Will the internet eventually destroy religion?

Even if it did, that would do nothing to prove how smart we all are.


For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”

1 Corinthians 1:19


Categories: Christianity

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

62 replies

  1. Yes. I think it will. Religious claims can’t stand up to close scrutiny.

    Liked by 1 person

    • More specifically, I guess I should have put it in the title, I was talking about Christianity here.

      And yes, it absolutely can stand up to close scrutiny.

      Thanks for stopping by GC 🙂

      By the way, most of the arguments against Christianity one can find online aren’t close scrutiny as much as they are tired talking points that have been soundly refuted countless times.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Haha. Nah mate. That’s why the number of religious people drop in 1st world countries where they have the time and resources to scrutinize religious claims.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I disagree. People who identify as religious “nones” are on the rise but I doubt all the counter information available has much to do with it, in fact, most of the information people cite to me is laughable.

          Problem, I think, is that Christianity is frowned upon, mocked, ridiculed,and misrepresented by society.

          I talk to people all the time who are not Christians, think they understand the faith, and yet have very little understanding of it at all. And these people are middle-class Americans.

          Evangelical atheists may think they have science and knowledge on their side but, fact is, they don’t and never have.

          This is taking into account the fact that there are people who won’t believe no matter what evidence is presented to them because they have not been called to belief by the Holy Spirit.

          Thanks for the comments by the way, good to see you around here.


          Liked by 1 person

          • Okay. So say you’re right for aeguments sake and Christianity is being mocked, ridiculed etc.

            Where would this most often take place?

            My money is on the Internet. Thus part of the reason the nones are on the rise.


          • Christianity is being mocked everywhere, TV, movies, the internet…

            So yes, the internet is making a nominal difference. The distinction you are missing is that Christianity isn’t losing any ground to good information. If it is critically analyzed by intellectually honest people, it stands up to scrutiny as well as it ever has.


          • Oh I politely disagree with you there but that’s to be expected since we are on opposite ends of the faith meter.

            What I think we can agree on is that the Internet can have a powerful effect on belief or lack of belief.

            It’s nice to see you as well. Hit me with a topic mate!


          • The Internet has a powerful effect all all kinds of beliefs, politics for example, but that’s not because the information is good.


          • I find most of the cases against religious claims of all kinds convincing. Not just Christianity either. Historically and scientifically they don’t hold water and most claims break the laws of physics and they don’t hold up to what we see is usually true in reality.


          • You would find that, that’s where you are in life. That doesn’t make any of what you believe true however.

            If people have not been moved by the Holy Spirit, they cannot come to faith no matter what they do. Who knows, you could be close to coming to faith yourself.


          • Perhaps. I guess anything is possible and I try to never close any doors intellectually. I always strive to challenge my point of views and keep an open mind to counter arguments.


  2. Well then GC, perhaps you need a refresher course on true religion, and I dare you or anybody on earth to find fault with this definition. Quite a challenge, but I’m confident God’s word lays bare our petty gripes.

    ‘Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from this world.’

    So then, so many people, so little time, and even fewer religious people. Isn’t it wonderful how our bias is revealed by the scorching light of scripture? I wish I was more religious.


    • What? So your definition of religion is to stay unspotted when visiting the fatherless and widows?

      I don’t know what to say to that. Definitely one of the strangest most nonsensical definitions of religion I’ve ever heard. I think even most believers would shake their head after hearing that definition.


      • I’m trying to help you GC. It’s not my definition, that’s the point.

        Do have a looksee in the book of James. There will always be they who care for the fatherless and the widows, so religion will always be alive and well.

        The various denominations simply prove there are a bunch of people trying to get it right.


      • GC, that definition is from scripture and describes the conduct of those who are not just following religious rules but have an inner reality of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
        Most believers, the biblically literate ones, know that passage quite well. In other words, true religion, true faith in God produces inner change and is not an external following of a set of rules. And since God wrote the book, guess whom you are calling strange and nonsensical.
        Your assertion about ‘most believers’ reveals your own level biblical literacy. If you are all about criticizing Christianity, or any religion, it would be wise to know what It teaches. By not doing so, you have no right to think you should be taken seriously.

        Liked by 1 person

        • That’s your interpretation of nonsense. I actually wrote this out and asked some very religious people I know if it makes sense and not one said they thought it did. It’s religous babble and does nothing to move the conversation forward.


          • Of course it won’t move the conversation forward. You sir, claim to be Godless. The same book states that all men know that God exists but suppress the truth they already know. That book says of those god deniers a couple of interesting things. Not only do they suppress truth, they hate the God they deny and are incapable of understanding spiritual matters and their minds have blind minds. Therefore, to converse with them about spiritual matters is headed nowhere unless God first opens their minds and hearts.

            I don’t know if you really deny God or not and therefore am not judging you. You might just be a troll looking for an an argument. Either way, this comment is meant for the edification of those who try and converse with you and might not be aware of the true nature of nonbelievers.

            Knowing the nature of fallen man should inform our conversation. Good day to you, Sir Godless.


          • I’m thankful not all Christians think this way or there would never be a reason to converse, and I’m thankful fir my religious readers because they offer an alternative perspective. I’d never insult them by saying they can never understand something because an invisible entity doesn’t think they’re special enough to understand my words.
            Good evening to you as well.


          • Apparently you missed my speaking about a certain kind of person and sharing what the Bible says about them. If you are a member of that class, then instead of feeling insulted read the Book.


          • No matter what kind of person, it’s insulting and I’m glad not all Christians think that way.

            I have read the book. I was a Christian. I’ve read it more than once from cover to cover.


          • If the Bible ‘insults’ the nonbeliever it just does. In fact there are a significant passages that say that the gospel is offensive to the nonbeliever. It’s a crying shame that many professing believers refuse to tell nonbelievers anything that might offend them. I’m not one of them. I am NOT ashamed of the gospel.


          • Not the book. Just you. Like I said, I’m glad they’re not like you. I value them and their perspective. There’s teally no reason to discuss anything with you.


          • Sorry, mate. the Bible is all I got. I would be a coward if I didn’t share what it has to say.


          • Your interpretation of it anyhow. I think you’re a coward anyhow, since your argument consists of merely dismissing one side without listening and hiding behind the bible to do it.


          • Why not read the book and find out if I am right? Saying it’s just my interpretation without being able to prove it Biblically is just an old tired ‘dodge’. Make an assertion then set about to substantiate it with something other than your opinion if you really want intelligent and thoughtful discourse. I might sound harsh, but you, my friend have invited it with your unkind rhetoric and casual dismissing of ‘religious’ people as being full of nonsense and incapable of rational thought. I’m calling you on it even if others won’t. If I am violating the spirit of this,blog I’m sure I will be told. If the blog host tells me I am out of line, I’ll leave.


          • Lol. Unkind? You’re the one saying I’m unable to understand anything. Do you even read my responses? I said I was a Christian and have read it several times. Even you must be aware that different people interpret the bible differently. You think your book says non-believers are unable to understand while other Christians disagree. That’s not unkind rhetoric. I called what one person said nonsense and explained why.

            Go away man. Since you don’t believe I’m able to understand, why bother talking to me at all? Go hide behind your book pretending it’s not a cowardly action on your part.


          • Wrong. I spoke of what the Bible says about unbelievers and said I didn’t really know where you stood. Read it again. That you admitted that you are in fact a nonbeliever and God denier is on you. Might be wiser to check out the Bible for yourself instead of accusing me of personally insulting you.


          • I’m obviously a non-believer. I’m an atheist. I don’t deny. I just don’t believe.

            Ive read it. I find it unconvincing.


          • 1 John 2:19, my friend.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Whatever. You’re not my friend either.


          • Dan,

            I was studying Revelation 3:16 in Matthews Henry’s Concise Commentary this morning and this line jumped out at me.

            “There are many in Hell, who once thought themselves far in the way to Heaven. Let us beg of God that we may not be left to flatter and deceive ourselves.”

            Not only do I agree with that 100 percent, I think its central meaning can be rightly applied to 1 John 2:19.

            If there are people who proclaim to be actual confessing Christians that will find themselves in Hell, certainly there are deconverts who were never truly saved despite what they may think.

            Causes of the indifference and inconsistency in religion Revelation 3:16 speaks of, the commentary goes on to say, are self-conceit and self-delusion. If one thinks about it, these, along with “flatter and deceive” in the above quote, are key words that explain quite a bit.



          • I didn’t want to weigh in too much here, this is a good discussion.

            I would however, like to say that you are on to something Dan. The Bible can very much be offensive to those who are perishing and it’s time Christians stop tap dancing around that just to appease non-believers.

            We preach the message of the Cross is but we did not write it.

            People who feign offense at what the scripture teaches are just trying to blame shift and make Christians seem heartless and uncaring.


  3. Did you intent for that question to be as loaded as it is? And I wonder from where the question originated? Was it posed by the typical snarky atheist troll, or was it the mournful prediction of a disillusioned believer? My point is that depending on the perspective there are several ways it could be answered.

    From a purely “religious” perspective, as I see it, the answer is an emphatic “No.” I don’t care what the empty skull formerly filled with rocks thinks, even the most ridiculous religious assertions will continue to thrive despite close investigation and scrutiny. For crying out loud, it is precisely BECAUSE of the internet that some crazy religious teachings have thrived! Ever heard of that little group called ISIS?

    Then there is the perspective of the church-goer – the traditionalist. Will the internet kill that type of religion? Oh, it won’t help it, I’m sure; however, I don’t believe it will kill it. For some people nothing will erase the need for gathering together in community, even if the alternative is access to a chat room while wearing nothing but underwear. No, nothing will stop some people from getting up and getting dressed and going to the meeting place for fellowship – even the atheists have their own churches, you know.

    But I think the real question is “will the internet destroy Christianity?” My response to that is “seriously?” For example, for the last two days I’ve had in my home a fellow Christian blogger who drove all the way from California, Jessie Jeanine Hanson. Why is she here? Well, despite the fact that she was intending to move to Tennessee (even though that’s not going to work out, I don’t think), she took a detour to come spend time with my family and me – we are now calling our house the Baker Blogger Bed and Breakfast. It was precisely because of the internet that we were able to encourage each other and build each other’s faith, ultimately leading to a personal encounter, genuine fellowship, and yes, going to church together to worship.

    So, will the internet kill religion? Give me a break.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Anthony,

      The question was directed to vocal non-believers who seem to think the “sound and reasonable” arguments against Christianity the we find all over the Internet will eventually lead to its demise.

      I, of course, think this is nonsensical.


      Liked by 1 person

    • I think you’re mistaking your own personal experience with the overall. While the Internet isn’t going to destroy religion obviously, it erodes it and has created an area where religion can be questioned. It has led to more nones in first world countries.

      There are many reasons ISIS thrives as well. Religious cults thrived before the Internet.


      • “Nones” in the first world are certainly not the “overall.” In addition, the nones don’t live in an Internet vacuum; there are plenty of other biased influences instructing them. As for religion vs Christianity, then let the questions come; those who are genuine are not afraid to deal with issues.

        And speaking of my experience, I’ve been in places around the world where many different influences should have been able to shake one’s faith, but it didn’t. Recently I heard them sing in Zimbabwe, “Every hour, every day, You are faithful, oh Lord!” The Internet can’t get a poor family living in dirt through the day, but Jesus can. So, when you give them the Internet and start preaching atheism, that’s when they laugh.

        Liked by 1 person

        • The statistics of the nones growing is the overall mate. It’s a statistical fact.

          I’ve heard a group of people say reason and rationality are better than faith. In fact, there are whole Reason Rallies.

          Doesn’t mean much. Again you’re extrapolating your personal experience for the overall picture. Overall, in first world countries, people are becoming less religious statistically.


          • Am I the only one who’s extrapolating? You’ve heard people say… So have I. You’ve seen statistics, and so have I. There are reason rallies, but there are also Christian rallies around the world, in every culture.

            But the point of this was the question of whether or not the Internet would destroy religion. By your own admission the answer is “no.” So, I’m moving on. It’s my birthday and I’ve got other things to do.


          • Happy birthday.

            Yet the statistics are in favor of lessening religion. So will the internet wipe religion out?

            Not completely.

            But over time it will erode it and likely religion will become fringe groups in the future. More education and less poverty will speed the erosion.

            And yes. I’m not extrapolating my personal experience. I said they didnt matter to the overall picture – the overall statistics do. Only you extrapolated a blogger visiting you into that meaning Christianity isn’t bleeding followers overall. Hell, I’ve met groups of bloggers from around the world but that doesn’t necessarily mean atheism is ‘winning’. The poll numbers are definitely encouraging though.


          • Time will tell. But so far all the other “silver bullets” have failed. I predict this shiny one will to. Thanks for the birthday wishes.


          • Poll numbers and the internet may be encouraging but I spend a good bit of my time in actual ministry and I can tell you that people are hungry for God like they haven’t been in a long time.

            Let this sink in a minute. I explain the message of the Gospel to American all the time who have never heard it. Educated Americans at that. Problem isn’t education, it’s the quality of education.


          • How would you like to write a post for my blog about this topic and get into the nitty gritty of your point of view and ill do the same for you – really get a conversation going.

            It’s an interesting topic.


          • Problem is, the Reason Rallies lack reason. I think another thing that could be at play here is that people are not that bright. I have interacted with countless people who consider themselves highly intelligent yet have no understanding of Christianity or the Bible other than what they have learned from really bad sources.

            Anthony makes a good point that shouldn’t be overlooked. I have been all over the world and know for a fact that westerners have a somewhat distorted view of reality.

            For example, I know people who haven’t struggled a day in their lives who reject Christianity because of pain and suffering and people who actually live in abject tgird world poverty who have incredible faith.


          • This would make for an interesting blog debate my friend.


        • By the way, you mean Zimbabwe, the third world country?

          That’s where religion thrives. I agree with that. Religious organizations target such areas. They prey on the poor.

          I was talking about first world countries.


          • You mean arrogant, prideful, bigoted first world countries? Yeah.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Yep. Pride and arrogance have a lot to do with it. In fact, this can be backed up with unambiguous Bible verses.

            Ironically, it’s always the most prideful and arrogant who reject this fact with the most vigor.

            Liked by 1 person

          • We could do more I think. I don’t think living in a first world country makes you automatically bigoted. Calling a whole group of people bigots because through no fault of their own, were born in a first world country though…that could be accurately labeked bigoted.


          • Yes, my comment was a blanket assertion, but so was, in my opinion, the implication that those in third world countries are more impressionable than their, shall we say, colonial masters. No, first world people are not automatically bigoted, but they (we) certainly do have the tendency to think we are inherently more capable than those in poorer countries.


          • No sir. People who are suffering, starving, scraping by are populations at risk. I’m a social worker. I work with people all the time who could be taken advantage of because if their economic or social settings. That’s precisely why ethically we arent allowed to do that.

            Religious organizations arent bound by such ethical rules and they know people who are desperate will do whatever they must to survive and are more easily taken advantage of.

            Has nothing to do with colonialism or bigotry to know that vulnerable populations are…vulnerable.


          • I am not a social worker but I work with the poor and downtrodden all the time and, if anything, they are less likely to be taken advantage of than anyone. For example, they are highly skeptical of anyone who says they are trying to help them and have very little trust or faith in the government.


          • You may think so but overall that’s not the case. They are called vulnerable populations because they are vulnerable.

            It’s good that you do your part to help people though. If we all did a little more, we could significantly reduce poverty and make the world a better place.

            Looking forward to your post! Be as controversial as you like man. You know I have no problem posting whatever you want to type up.


          • Out of curiosity, is it not possible to take advantage of those who don’t feel disadvantaged? Is it not possible that the truly weak are the ones who’s temporal needs are met, therefore they have no need of a faith that looks beyond themselves? Could it not be argued that the self-sufficient have no need of any god, much less the God of Christianity, when they themselves are their own gods, and thereby are at risk for spiritual blindness and ultimate deception? The poor are certainly at risk, but they are certainly “blessed” in ways the rich of this world find difficult to understand.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I agree that in many ways, some of the people I work with are blessed (in a non-magical sort of way) and tgey are a blessing in my life. I don’t think it takes a god to recognize that.

            Intetesting point though and I appreciate your willingness to converse. I’d like to extend the same thing to you that I did James above – I’d love to have you guest post on my blog about this or the Internet topic it stemmed from. Although I think this point expanded on would make a heck of a topic and I could reply to it. I don’t censor anything on my blog and have no problem publishing differing opinions. I think it would be fun.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Thanks. I’ll give it some thought (and prayer).

            Liked by 2 people

          • Great point Anthony. It has been my experience that the “advantaged” often assume what the disadvantaged should be thinking without taking the time to get to know them.

            I personally know dozens of materially poor people who believe they are truly blessed. In fact, I hear more people thanking God when I am working in a homeless mission than I do anywhere else, including church.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. Simple answer: NO. Jesus said “I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not overcome it.” That’s His final answer.

    Liked by 2 people


  1. Will the internet eventually destroy religion? — The Isaiah 53:5 Project | Talmidimblogging

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: