Thank you for some wisdom here and not enclosing ‘religion’ in the Christianity envelope. I find most respondents here equate Christianity and religion as synonymous. Christian polemic is fine but generally the responders are not aware that their are other traditions, other Chritisnities than the evangelical form and that religion is not a blanket term for the specifically evangelical Christian ethos.

I would posit that society and its collective knowledge/understanding has grown exponentially in the last 200+ years when compared to how limited it was under the repressive/suppressive reign of Xtian Beliefs, etc. counting back from the Industrial Revolution to the inception of the Holy Roman Empire, a.k.a. the Catholic Church.

Just as there have been hundreds, if not thousands of ' Empires' throughout human history, and eventually those empires have also fallen as well.

Hear, Hear and kudos to you my friend.

I suspect that the most effective player in the dumbing down process is the ‘culture industry’ a term coined by sociologist Theodor Adorno. See below the link to a very concise article as to what he referred. Obvious when you see it but not when you don’t

[culturalstudiesnow.blogspot.com]

A bloody good regimen of dosing with something like Glyphosate might get rid those pesky roots though....LOL.

Knowledge and Understanding, when ALLOWED and NOT restricted by external influences, dispels ignorance, opens up the mind and, more often than not, creates within the brain a fervent desire to gain even more knowledge, etc.
I am very pleased and proud to see that via his parents, my 4 year old nephew, Henry, has a very fervent desire and drive to learn about everything and anything.
Yes, his parents are Atheists, yes they are both very well educated and whenever Henry asks a question they give a correct answer to it in the terms/language he can comprehend easily and clearly and they do NOT restrict in any way what kind of questions he asks, that is allowing Knowledge to be accumulated as freely as possible and unrestricted.

@Triphid In no way do I oppose science or knowledge or the free spread of information!

What I am saying is that human knowledge has limits, and that at heart all of our highly vaunted knowledge is superficial. It will always be that way regardless of whether there are external influences or not. You must admit that there are some very deep and profound questions for which science has no answers, and in most cases does not even address.

What religions could do potentially is foster deep awareness, awe, and appreciation for existence. This in no way would impede the spread of knowledge. What it would do is promote value and respect for all life.

@WilliamFleming The only limit/s that can be placed upon knowledge are those imposed either, a) by the person pursuing such knowledge or, b) the EXTERNAL influences of State or religions, etc.

@Triphid That’s an interesting perspective, but it’s one I don’t share.What about dogs? Don’t you think there’s a limit to what they can learn and understand? They are our cousins and are clearly limited. Why would we be exempt from limitations?

It’s not just brain capacity. Our way of knowing is based on a matter/space/time model and that model is no more than a crude symbolic representation of ultimate reality. In a crucial way we humans are abysmally ignorant of ultimate reality, and using current methods of inquiry, we will be forever ignorant and bewildered.

Religion is not going to stand in the way of learning. If anything appreciation for the mystery of reality lends the keenest of motivation to survive, learn, understand and live well.

@WilliamFleming Firstly, to your question/ comment re-dogs: I have quite a number of dogs throughout my years, from cross-bred ' mongrels' to Pedigreed Dogs whom I've taught and trained myself and have had the pleasure of watching learn for themselves right from young puppies right through to old adults. Like us they never stop learning UNLESS external ' forces' are imposed to stop them. They are only, as we are, ' limited' by circumstances imposed, either directly or indirectly, upon them.
Humans and human brains are vastly unexploited in their capacity for absorbing and comprehending knowledge, we use only a small amount of the power our brains are capable of in comparison to its actual ability and capacity and we still know far less about our brain than we do of the world around us.
Ergo, given the opportunity and will to do so we have NO limits on what we can learn, understand and comprehend IF left to our own resources and without external restraints, limitations and impositions.
Religion, Xtianity in particular under the Auspices of the Catholic Church has and still does to some smaller extent these days, thankfully, imposed and restricted the gaining of knowledge and understanding and in times past has done so with a iron fist to say the very least.
Religions, Xtianity especially, will continue to strive to fight against ANYTHING that seems as a threat to its dominance over people, it will cite scripture after scripture, religious ethic after religious ethic, etc, etc, for example, Stem Cell research has proven that it can and does help in innumerable treatments of debilitating injuries and illnesses BUT the Churches scream loudly against it, We can give a family pet a good, noble and pain-free death by Euthanasia and that is fine by any Church BUT a human with a Terminal Disease must suffer intolerably the pain, the indignity and ignobility of a long, and often, linger death simply because some religion armed with the Goatherders Guide to the Galaxy, a.k.a. the Bible, states that Euthanasia for humans goes against the Will of this Imaginary, Invisible God of theirs.
Of course religion/s stand in the way of innumerable things, they always have and they will continue doings until WE, the HUMAN Race, stand up and say NO MORE we want our right to chose for ourselves, to think for ourselves.

@Triphid

No limits aye?. Can your dogs work out differential equations?

The discussion is supposed to be about religions of the future. I agree that some churches have had a negative effect on scholarship. On the other hand, at times churches have kept scholarship alive, especially the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages. I think you are exaggerating the power of religious organizations to stymie learning. Anyone wanting to learn will do so regardless of silly church dogma. There are many examples of great intellectuals who came from religious backgrounds and continued their religious sentiments all through life. Religion is not just about belief in dogma. Even today, in the US half of all scientists say they believe in God.

Back to the topic at hand, you seem to lump all churches together and insinuate that they need to somehow be eliminated if the human race is to advance. If you only looked you’d find various religious organizations that require no belief and that promote only awareness, awe, love, and appreciation for the staggering implications of the mystery of existence. It is hard for me to see how such appreciation in any way impedes knowledge. On the contrary, such appreciation spurs intense curiosity and is the driver of all human creativity. Without the religious impulse there’d be no science in the first place.

So as I said before, religion will evolve with the times.

@WilliamFleming No they can't as far I know, but I have had many who I've observed who have worked out the differences between sliding doors and swinging doors and how to open them, a Blue Heeler who worked out for himself how to actual unscrew caps from bottles to get at the drink inside WITHOUT damaging the bottle in any way by simple hold the bottle between his front paws and twisting the cap around using his teeth. Many species of Primates ( Apes) have learned to make and use simple tools to enable them to get into the shells of nuts or ants out of ant nests rather than simply going in search of other easier food sources, isn't that how humans began to learn such skills in the early stages of our evolution?

I'd love to hear a discussion between him and Jordon Peterson. The new Christianity might centre on the Logos rather than the resurrection and I would like to hear how the implications of that might be brought out in discussion.

@brentan I find Jordan Peterson to be too full of himself, despite whatever useful points he makes.

@p-nullifidian I just listen in awe to his big brain articulate the most complicated ideas. His articulation allows me to make further steps towards understanding big issues. And myself.

@brentan And if you take all that away from Christianity, nothing but the outline of a shaddow on the wall remains.

@Fernapple I would consider the idea of the Logos to be a philosophy rather than a shadow on the wall.

They're "survival" is actually irrelevant. It would probably be far more beneficial to the rest of the population if they didn't.

@KKGator
Certainly if they don't change their ways.
One way or the other, religion will be forced to change.
We can do away with organizational structures, and even concepts and habits, but we can't do away with human nature. If what we today call religion crumbles and falls away, something else similar will rise to take its place, because there is a real human need that an authentic (not corrupt) religion fills, that nothing else does.

It doesn't matter what we call it, humans will always have a category of endeavor that exalts and fosters our most valued social and interpersonal attitudes.

Ah, but that began about 200+ years ago and it has been gaining pace ever since.

Perhaps, but the vice grip of religions is slowly and steadily weakening as the human species becomes more aware of itself and the Universe around. It may not come with a thunderous crash, but more as weak, simpering crumble something like the bank of a river/creek that has been undercut by years and years erosion from fast flowing waters passing through.

they do not combat spiritual malaise, whatever that is (i am not in favor of so-called spirituality anyway -- i think it's "religion light" ). if anything they cause it.

g

@genessa I'm not sure I should argue this with someone who doesn't know what malaise is and thinks spirituality is religion light. Words have to be understood to form a basis for discussion.

@brentan you think i don't know what malaise is? i certainly shouldn't argue with someone who makes ridiculous assumptions about me. did you not see that i questions SPIRITUAL malaise, not malaise? why should i argue with someone who reads to carelessly? and spirituality IS religion light. your not agreeing with me on that point doesn't mean i am ignorant. it means we disagree. words DO have to be understood to form a basis for discussion. you most certainly did not understand mine.

g

@genessa If you know what malaise is, there is no excuse for not understanding spiritual malaise. You might claim that it isn’t an issue or doesn’t exist but you will know what the term means.
If you look up spirituality in the dictionary, you won’t find ‘religion light’. The closest you might get is an approach to religion but that won’t necessarily be categorised as light.
I never concluded you were ignorant. I do think you are letting your anger at religion dictate meanings to you.

@brentan i don't need a dictionary to tell me my take on spirituality. if that is how you define things that have been defined many different ways, fine. to me it's religion light. and i am not angry at religion. i think it's silly and sometimes destructive; i'm not angry at the concept. you don't have to be angry not to believe in something.

g

@genessa We’ve come around again to what words mean and the difference between dictionary definitions and our own interpretations. If I hold to dictionary definitions and they disagree with your interpretation, we have no common basis for discussion.
I don’t know what to make of your comment that you don’t believe in religion because as an atheist, I don’t either. As you can probably guess, I’m certainly not angry about religion either.

@brentan well it's good we're not angry anyway.

g

Since leaving my faith, I have had more awe-inspiring experiences than I could have imagined, more than enough to overcome my 'spiritual malaise.' In music, in art, in nature and in science, I dug deeper, read more and filled my 'spirit.' I bought some telescopes, joined an astronomy club and began to study the universe. Telescopes are time machines that enable us to see into the distant past. When looking at the Andromeda galaxy, the photons landing on your cornea left their stars millions of years ago. Laying out on the desert floor on a moonless night and staring at the Milky Way inspires me like no church ever could.

@p-nullifidian So did I, and in the same ways. But my good fortune is not reflected in society at large. For that reason, I would like to see religion have a place in society until secular humanist values have replaced the need for religious values.

@brentan Agreed. Hence the reference to Bishop Spong, above.