3 World Religions That Will Not Coexist With The Religion Of Secular Humanism

It has been said that Secular Humanism seeks to advance secular
principles that will allow people with conflicting religious beliefs to
coexist. My view is The Religion Of Secular Humanism will fail to
achieve this goal in the 21st century and in all future human history.
My view is that The Religion Of Secular Humanism will eventually
be vanished off the planet by the world's major religions.

No coexistence.
Theism has 2 aggressive evangelizing Faiths, Islam and Christianity.

Theism worldwide is very strong and very healthy.
2.8 billion Muslims plus 2.9 billion Christians by 2050.
That comes out to 5.7 billion Theists by 2050 And that's not counting the Jews.
5.7 billion Theists is going to be a lot of Theists by 2050

Start quote.
Projected Growth Of Christianity By 2050
Some of the projections are as follows:
[96]

1. Over the 2010-2050 period, Christians will remain the largest religious group with 30.7% of the world’s population. However, Islam will grow faster and become 29.7% of the world’s population. Therefore, by 2050 there will be 2.8 billion Muslims compared to 2.9 billion Christians.
2. “In the United States, Christians will decline from more than three-quarters of the population in 2010 to two-thirds in 2050.”
3. “Four out of every 10 Christians in the world will live in sub-Saharan Africa.

In the section By Country, here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ...wth#By_country
End quote.

Christendom, according to the linked article, will decline in the United States by 2050 . . .

However JAG Writes:
Christendom Will Be Huge-Enormous In The Global South
And Elsewhere , , ,

Christianity is growing in Africa.

Christendom is growing in China. There is a huge "underground" Christianity in China.
Christian House Church.

Christianity is huge in South Korea --and growing.

Christianity is huge-enormous in South America and in Central America.

_____________


No coexistence.
Both Christianity and Islam are evangelizing Faiths out to
convert the world.

Christianity makes converts through peaceful evangelism.

Neither Christianity or Islam has even a slight intention of
making peace with the Religion Of Secular Humanism
or with The Religion Of Atheism.

The Lord Jesus, the Founder of Christianity, told His Christian
Church to go into all the world and make disciples of all nations
teaching them to obey His commands. His Christian Church
will obey His command and will carry out to completion this
task to evangelize the entire world -- this task will require many
millenniums yet ahead. Meanwhile there can be no coexistence
involved in this command known as Christ's Great Commission
given to His Church at the end of Matthew's gospel in chapter 28,.
to go and make disciples of all the nations. Christianity is out to
evangelize the entire world.

And so is Islam.

____________


Hinduism , , ,
The world's largest non-Theistic Religion, Hinduism, is not willing
to coexist with the Religion Of Secular Humanism either.
Hinduism has "1.25 billion followers, or 15–16% of the global population."

Hinduism is a fighting faith

"Religious violence in India includes acts of violence by followers of one
religious group against followers and institutions of another religious
group, often in the form of rioting. Religious violence in India has
generally involved Hindus and Muslims"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence_in_India

________________

By 2050 , ,
Christianity will have 2.9 billion
Islam will have 2.8 billion
Hindus now have 1,25 billion
, , , these 3 will not coexist with the Religion Of Secular Humanism.
Those 3 together make up the vast majority of Humanity and they
have no intention of coexisting with the Religion Of Secular Humanism.
Prepare for continued Ideological War for all of the 21st century and most
likely for the next several centuries yet to come.
"Only the dead have seen an end to War."__Plato

JAG

``
.

 

Any religion that can accept not being a theocracy can coexist with secular humanism. It isn't even difficult for them to do so.

 

Actually the vast majority of theists are quite happy to coexist with non theists and theists of a different flavour. It is only the religious fundamentalists who are so perverse that they want to impose their religious beliefs on others, often through violence since they cannot use logic and reason. The biggest threat to these fundamentalists is the apathy towards gods since gods are mostly irrelevant to modern lives. My own country is a good example of this with church attendance falling year on year and in many places church congregations falling to less than 20.

Christianity will not go down fighting against other theists it will go out quietly, on its knees with nobody caring.

 

It is necessary for religious fundamentalists to try to divide people, they preach peace but want division often in direct contradiction of their own religious core principles. Live and let live is an anathema to them.

 

Stop spreading hate and war.

 

That was definitely the case with the church I grew up with and with most fundamentalists I've met. Frankly, I think it was the norm for most of Christianity until the Enlightenment. Some Eastern Orthodox traditions, as well as maybe some Celtic traditions, however, were less forceful, and my Quaker friends have been quite open and affirming of other beliefs. Various "pagan" communities were also less forceful in this regard. It just depends on the tradition.

The telling part here is when they find just basic secularism as somehow being its own "religious force," reasoning that the inability to force their religion on others is somehow the same as the state promotion of atheism. Complete nonsense.

 

Christendom Will Be Huge-Enormous In The Least educated areas of the world!

Odd thing to boast about!

 

I spread no hate.
Hate was your word.
You are my Ideological Enemy
Hate is your personal Spin on my OP.
The word hate is not in my OP.
The concept of hate is not in my OP.
The Hate exists in your mind.
I wrote the following in my OP
"Christianity makes converts through peaceful evangelism."___JAG

"Only the dead have seen an end to War."__Plato
I spread no War.
But I will post on War to my heart's content and there is nothing
YOU can do to stop me.
But this OP is not about War.

JAG


~~

 

That's all you do, spread hate and division, the same as religion does, persecuting and demonising women and minorities, evangelicals preach hatred against gay people just like you do, just go and review what you said:
Neither Christianity or Islam has even a slight intention of
making peace with the Religion Of Secular Humanism
or with The Religion Of Atheism.
Hinduism is a fighting faith

"Religious violence in India includes acts of violence by followers of one
religious group against followers and institutions of another religious
group, often in the form of rioting. Religious violence in India has
generally involved Hindus and Muslims
Prepare for continued Ideological War for all of the 21st century and most
likely for the next several centuries yet to come.
"Only the dead have seen an end to War."__Plato

Your filth should be removed from the world.

 

We know how to deal with them in Bristol!



Two street preachers who used offensive language during an event in Bristol city centre have been convicted of a religiously aggravated public order offence.


The men were arrested in Broadmead in July last year following complaints about comments they were making about Islam and homesexuality.

Michael Overd, 52, of Creech St Michael, Taunton and 50-year-old Michael Stockwell, of Selden, New York, USA, were found guilty following a trial at Bristol Magistrates’ Court.

https://www.bristol247.com/news-and-features/news/evangelical-street-preachers-convicted/

 

Secular humanism is not a religion.

https://secularhumanism.org/what-is-secular-humanism/secular-humanism-defined

From the Free Inquiry site:

"We come to the crux: Is secular humanism a religion? An orientation document on the [former] Council for Secular Humanism Web site said no: “Secular humanism lacks essential characteristics of a religion.”9 Everyday parlance assumes that religion has to do with a god or gods, life eternal, and similar supernatural claims. Yet thinkers as varied as John Dewey, Paul Tillich (1886–1965), and A.H. Maslow (1908–1970) sought to extend the definition of the words religion or religious so as to encompass “ultimate concerns” with or without transcendental content. In A Common Faith, Dewey chose to define religion and religious dissimilarly. Religion retained its common association with the transcendent or supernatural while religious was held to subsume any commitment of deep significance."

Also from that site:

"We can now attempt our definition of secular humanism. Secular humanism begins with atheism (absence of belief in a deity) and agnosticism or skepticism (epistemological caution that rejects the transcendent as such due to a lack of evidence). Because no transcendent power will save us, secular humanists maintain that humans must take responsibility for themselves. While atheism is a necessary condition for secular humanism, it is not a sufficient one. Far from living in a moral vacuum, secular humanists “wish to encourage wherever possible the growth of moral awareness and the capacity for free choice and an understanding of the consequences thereof.”

"Secular humanism emerges, then, as a comprehensive nonreligious life stance that incorporates a naturalistic philosophy, a cosmic outlook rooted in science, and a consequentialist ethical system. That is the definition I offer."

That doesn't sound like a religion to me.

More from that site about secular humanism and why it is called a religion by those on the Christian Right.

"Our denials aside, Christian Right activists ceaselessly make the case that secular humanism is a religion. In 1980, Religious Right activist Phyllis Schlafly charged: “Secular Humanism has become the established religion of the U.S. public school system … and the various rationales that have caused public schools to eliminate prayer, moral training, and the teaching of basics.”"

"By calling secular humanism a religion, Christian Right activists hope to bar modern science, evolutionary theory, sex education, nonbiblical values, and pedagogical innovation from public schools. In other words, “secular humanism has to be extirpated.”16 Large campaigns have been mounted to achieve this. In 1986, 624 parents aided by then-Governor George Wallace sued Alabama, alleging that forty-four public school textbooks unconstitutionally promoted the “religion of secular humanism.” The case, heard initially by a sympathetic federal judge, W. Brevard Hand, became a media circus. Subpoenaed to the trial, Paul Kurtz was cross-examined for ten hours about whether secular humanism was or was not religious.17 (Judge Hand’s ruling in favor of the plaintiffs was overturned on appeal."

 

Your post has nothing to do with my OP.

The Religion Of Secular Humanism is a religious force.
If you google "Secular Humanism is a religion" you will discover
that a lot of people believe that it is a religion. And they are
correct. It is a religion -- the Religion Of Secular Humanism.

Start quote.
"John Staddon, an emeritus professor of biology and psychology
at Duke University, authored an article that engendered a wee bit
of controversy when he claimed that “secular humanism” was a
religion. He went so far to say that atheistic “secular humanism”
has been “intolerantly thuggish, imposing dogma, punishing
blasphemy, and harboring an acute hatred for Christianity.

Not surprisingly, we read such reactions: “Evolutionist seethes as
Duke professor analyzes secular ‘religion.’” Atheist Jerry Coyne
writes: “The editors (of “Quillette”) screwed up by accepting a
piece that makes very little sense, and arrives at its conclusion
by some risibly tortuous logic … Why did the editors of “Quillette”
publish this odiferous serving of tripe?” As one observer notes,
Jerry Coyne’s reaction tended to “confirm Staddon’s hypothesis
about atheists tendency to be “censoriously thuggish. , , , ,

, , , He writes: “In terms of moral rules, secular humanism is
indistinguishable from a religion,”
End quote
https://christianindex.org/baxter-secular-humanism-religion-136/

I may put some more quotes in the thread from this article.

____________________


This from the wiki article titled Secular Humanism , , ,

" , , , Comte had attempted to introduce a "religion of humanity" in light of growing
anti-religious sentiment and social malaise in revolutionary France. This religion
would necessarily fulfil the functional, cohesive role that supernatural religion
once served.

In 1878, the Society established the Church of Humanity under Congreve's direction.
There they introduced sacraments of the Religion of Humanity , , , ,

The New York City version of the church was established by English immigrant Henry Edger.
The American version of the "Church of Humanity". was largely modeled on the English church.
Like the English version it wasn't atheistic and had sermons and sacramental rites.[13]
At times the services included readings from conventional religious works like the Book
of Isaiah.[14]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism#Positivism_and_the_Church_of_Humanity

The ONLY point from the Wiki page is that even the Wiki article on Secular Humanism
makes the connection between certain aspects of Secular Humanism and religion -- "the
Church Of Humanity" indeed.And everybody knows that Wikipedia is dominated by Liberals.

Who knows what that means?
If you mean that the OP wants to force Christianity on anyone,
then it is your post that is spouting "complete nonsense."
"Christianity makes converts through peaceful evangelism."___JAG in the OP

JAG

``

 

`
"Atheism Is A Religion"
"One of the bloggers, Dr. Sam, stated rather bluntly: “Atheism is a religion.”
He then went on to explain why. Atheist are “believers in ‘magic creation.’
Just through enough of billions of years at it and ‘puff!’ you have Man.”
Atheists believe “in a supreme being – man himself is supreme. ‘Self’
rules and is at the center of the atheist’s world and worldview… Atheism
is the ultimate expression of full blown narcissism.” He states: ‘No Higher
Law except man himself. Man determines what is right or wrong with no
outside point of reference…”
https://christianindex.org/baxter-secular-humanism-religion-136/

JAG

``

 

I'm familiar with the fundamentalist propaganda regarding secular humanism. It's just that it is nonsense. I can go into more detail if you'd like. But, no, secular humanism is not synonymous with, for example, Comte's positivism. In fact, I've yet to meet many humanists even receptive of Comte's philosophy. There's a reason why his churches failed, and his positive fell out of favor even in secular circles decades ago.

 

``
The Religion Of Secular Humanism , , ,

"When we seek to understand secular humanism it is wise to read
and examine the “Humanist Manifestos, I and II.” In the preface to
these manifestos published by Promethus Books, Paul Kurtz wrote:
“Humanism is a philosophical, religious and moral point of view as
old as human civilization itself. It has its roots in classical China,
Greece, and Rome; it is expressed in the Renaissance and the
Enlightenment, in the scientific revolution, and in the twentieth
century …”

He went on to say: “In 1933 a group of thirty-four liberal humanists
in the United States defined and enunciated the philosophical and
religious principles that seemed to them fundamental. They
drafted the ‘Humanist Manifesto I.’” Within this manifesto we read
about these humanists’ desire for a “vital, fearless, and frank religion
capable of furnishing adequate social goals and personal
satisfactions … to establish such a religion is a major necessity
of the present.” They affirmed certain “beliefs” such as how
“Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and
not created.”

https://christianindex.org/baxter-secular-humanism-religion-136/

JAG

``

 

Not propaganda just because you say it is.
Not nonsense just because you say it is.
Go into as much detail as you like.
Secular Humanism is still The Religion Of Secular Humanism.
See my posts in this thread.

You didn't read my post carefully, I said only this about the
Wiki article.
JAG Wrote:
The ONLY point from the Wiki page is that even the Wiki article
on Secular Humanism makes the connection between certain
aspects of Secular Humanism and religion -- "the Church Of
Humanity" indeed. And everybody knows that Wikipedia is
dominated by Liberals.___JAG

JAG

``

 

Yet everything you say about secular humanism must be true just because you say it is? Your stance is widely self-contradictory. And the Wikipedia article is right to only make tangential mention of the "Church of Humanity." Comte's teachings aren't widely accepted by secular humanists and the only existing church of his that I can think of that is still active is one barely-attended church in Brazil. I'm sure one or two still exist, but he just isn't that popular among humanists. The connections are sparse because the connections are weak.

 

Why are you only referring to the manifesto that has twice been superseded? And why are you referring to RELIGIOUS humanists in order to make statements about SECULAR humanists?

 

False.

False.
You just said that religion spreads hate -- so that tells
me all I need to know about your biases and prejudices.
You are my Ideological Enemy.

That has nothing to do with me.
And nothing to do with my OP
I do not demonize any human beings.
I do not demonize women and do not demonize minorities.

False.
They do not.

False.
I do not.

I am proud of what I said.
I will repeat it again and again and again.
There is nothing YOU can do to stop it.

That is exactly what I said.
I will say it AGAIN for you.
Neither Christianity or Islam has even a slight intention of
making peace with the Religion Of Secular Humanism
or with The Religion Of Atheism.
Hinduism is a fighting faith

Some of that was from a quoted wiki article.
Some if it was what I said.
I will say it AGAIN for you.
"Religious violence in India includes acts of violence by followers of one
religious group against followers and institutions of another religious
group, often in the form of rioting. Religious violence in India has
generally involved Hindus and Muslims"
Prepare for continued Ideological War for all of the 21st century and most
likely for the next several centuries yet to come.
"Only the dead have seen an end to War."__Plato

You are my Ideological Enemy.
I do not fear your hate-filled-posts.

JAG

 

And a lot of people believe Christianity is nonsense. And they are correct.

 

This is not a Plato quote.

 

Would you say that your thesis could in any way help to explain how the Bolshevik Party of Russia of 1917 that was over eighty percent Jewish............ (but rather Skeptical, Agnostic or Atheistic Jews, not Orthodox or Conservative Jews)...... decided to rid Russia of Christianity and observant Judaism? (Or at least that is how it appears to me from what I have read so far)?????

Could it be that the "Secular Humanists" of Russia of 1917 may have decided that the best DEFENCE... is a crushing offensive!!??

 

I never said that.
I never even implied that.
That is what you said.
I am not perfect .
I make mistakes just like you do -- like every human does.
I post what I believe to be true --- just like you do.
I can be wrong on some stuff -- just like you.
Just like everybody can be wrong on some stuff.
_______

I have a question for you.
Why are you so strong against the idea that Secular Humanism is
a Religion? What is so bad about the word "religion" that causes
you to "rise up" and make posts against the idea? The fact that
you do that is telling.
Why not just "pass it off" as no big deal?
There is nothing bad or ugly about the word "religion."

You could even take it as a compliment.
If you wanted to.
Me saying that Secular Humanism is a Religion is not
a bad thing to say about Secular Humanism.

I speak about the Religion Of Atheism too.
That's not a bad thing to say either.
The word "religion" is NOT a dirty world.
It is not a curse word.

Why are you so strong against the word "religion"?

Incorrect.
It is not.
I do not contradict myself.

THAT was the ONLY POINT I made.
I repeat , ,
I repeat because you are not paying any attention to what I told you , , ,

JAG Wrote:
The ONLY point from the Wiki page is that even the Wiki article
on Secular Humanism makes the connection between certain
aspects of Secular Humanism and religion -- "the Church Of
Humanity" indeed. And everybody knows that Wikipedia is
dominated by Liberals.___JAG

So what.
JAG Wrote:
The ONLY point from the Wiki page is that even the Wiki article
on Secular Humanism makes the connection between
certain aspects of Secular Humanism and religion --
"the Church Of Humanity" indeed. And everybody knows that
Wikipedia is dominated by Liberals.___JAG

So what?
JAG Wrote:
The ONLY point from the Wiki page is that even the Wiki article
on Secular Humanism makes the connection between certain
aspects of Secular Humanism and religion -- "the Church Of
Humanity" indeed. And everybody knows that Wikipedia is
dominated by Liberals.___JAG

You IGNORE my point.
I will repeat my point.

So what?
Same thing , , , my ONLY POINT thingy. Again.

By the way, why are you focused on the Wiki article and are mostly
ignoring my stronger posts demonstrating that Secular Humanism is in
fact the Religion Of Secular Humanism?
Why do you all hate religion so much?
What did religion ever do to you, to cause you to hate it so much.
Or maybe you prefer the word "dislike" instead of the word "hate."
You and your Ideological Tribe most certainly do strongly "dislike"
the word "religion." This is telling.
It appears to me that the very word "religion" causes the hairs to
bristle on the neck of some on your Ideological side.



JAG

``

 

As a 'Christian Humanist' (as it were) and opponent of any form of theocracy, it seems to me our laws should be made to promote order, not morality. Morality is an individual value, not something to be enforced on the masses. Religion is just spirituality corrupted by being merged with the authority of the state, and morality is meaningless when defined democratically. Leave morality to the individual and legislate based on the needs of social function vs liberty.

 

No To A Theocracy , , ,
You are "seeing things" in the OP that are not there.

You are "reading between the lines" and drawing your
personal conclusions -- conclusions that the OP does
not state and does not desire to see come into being.

I do not want to see a theocracy arise anywhere in the
world.

theocracy - "a system of government in which priests rule in the name of God or a god."

I want no part in any kind of theocracy. Not ever. Never.

The only kind of government that I want to see is the
Democratic Republic that we have here in America.

Christianity Does Not Advance In the
World Through The Courts , , ,
I do not want to see Christian morality codified into law
and enforced by police with guns. Why not? Because to
enforce it would require a police state which would be a
very bad situation and would be a violation of Christianity's
Plan to peacefully evangelize the world with the results
that human beings will come to love God with all their
minds, hearts, and souls and will keep His laws because
they love Him and desire to please Him --- and not because
they fear courts backed up by police with guns.

Nothing But Peaceful Evangelism And Democratic Republics , , , ,
One key sentence in my OP is this one:
"Christianity makes converts through peaceful evangelism."___JAG in the OP

By the way, my view is the Christian nations of the future will be
Democratic Republics. The Lord Jesus told His Christian Church
to go and make disciples of all the nations. When this is completed
in the far future -- there will be governments in all nations -- and
my view is they will be Christian Democratic Republics.

Me too.
I say no to any form of theocracy,

Whose morality? Yours? Your morality?
Are you selective in the laws you support?
Are you 100% for laws that you personally like?
And against laws that you do not personally like?

I do not know what your position is on the Social Issues,
but many people {not talking about you} are highly selective
in the laws "they like" --- and they do not even try to hide
their hypocrisy and their "double-standards" as they basically
want laws that "protect their butts" and that "protect their money"
and that "protect their freedoms" and then on the Social Issues
they personally hold a "Barnyard Sexual Moral Code" that is based
upon their own personal gross immorality. {again not talking about you}

Many Highly Selective Liberals Are 100% For Laws That , , ,
~ protect them personally from being robbed or physically harmed
~ protect their personal freedoms
~ protect their money , , ,

, , , but they are totally against laws the prohibit their Barnyard Sexual Immorality.

What is the Christian solution to this?
Answer: Christianity changes behavior by changing the hearts of men
and this is done ONLY through peaceful evangelism --- never through
any type of Force, including the Force of human courts backed up
by police with guns.

Are you highly selective in the laws you support?
Would you apply your "morality is an individual value" to any area
that put your person, freedoms, or money at risk?

Does { ? } your "morality is an individual value" apply mostly to stuff like , , , ,
~ abortion
~ pornography
~ nude dancing
~ no fault divorce
~ use of "Mary Warner"
~ fornication
~ adultery
~ freedom to make R-Rated Movies with graphic sex scenes and vile language
~ freedom to make NC-17 Rated Movies with explicit sex scenes and/or gross violence and horror
~ public cursing and vile filthy public language
~ sexual perversion
~ homosexuality
~ sexual freedoms , , , , ,

, , is that right?

Bestiality And Necrophilia , , , ,
■ Just curious?
Would you be FOR or AGAINST laws against Bestiality?
Why laws against Bestiality?
But not laws against Fornication and Adultery?
How about laws against Necrophilia?
Would you be FOR or AGAINST laws against Necrophilia?
How does a person who practices Necrophilia do any harm
to you?
I am merely curious about how you would apply your principles
in your post up there to Bestiality and Necrophilia? {Both really
BAD-EVIL behavior.in my view.}

Remember I am NOT calling for any type of theocracy.
I am ONLY calling your attention to ideas to "think upon"
when you say "Morality is an individual value, not something
to be enforced on the masses"
However when it comes to , , ,
~ protecting you personally from being robbed or physically harmed
~ protecting your personal freedoms
~ protecting your money , , ,

, , then you DO want morality to be forced on the masses, right?

Agreed.
And totally corrupted too.
Christianity first changes hearts and minds, then THAT is what
changes behavior .

Yeah but NOT when it comes to , ,

~ protecting you personally from being robbed or physically harmed
~ protecting your personal freedoms
~ protecting your money , , ,

, , is that right?

I interpret that to mean you are all FOR laws that . . .
~ protect you personally from being robbed or physically harmed
~ protect your personal freedoms
~ protect your money , , ,

But you are AGAINST laws that prohibit , , ,

~ abortion
~ pornography
~ nude dancing
~ no fault divorce
~ use of "Mary Warner"
~ fornication
~ adultery
~ freedom to make R-Rated Movies with graphic sex scenes and vile language
~ freedom to make NC-17 Rated Movies with explicit sex scenes and/or gross violence and horror
~ public cursing and vile filthy public language
~ sexual perversion
~ homosexuality
~ sexual freedoms , , ,

, , ,is that right?

By all that up there I am merely giving you something to think about.
It is nothing more than "food for thought."

I do NOT know what your personal beliefs are and nothing I have
written in this post should be interpreted as me saying you hold any
certain view. I am merely asking questions to stimulate the
conversion.

Do not forget I do NOT want to see Christian Morality codified
and enforced by the courts backed up by police with guns. Rather
my view is that Christianity first changes hearts and minds through
peaceful evangelism, then THAT is what changes behavior.

Best.

JAG

PS
Thank you for your comments. You made some interesting points.


``