Will God be obsolete in 100 years?

[zen]

Will the expansion of science and knowledge over the next 100 or so years "kill" god?

From Darwin to Einstein to Hawking, advances in science and a deeper understanding of our natural world has challenged the ideology behind the god created man principle. Genesis. The Big Bang, black holes, string theory, quantum mechanics. Is the paradigm of god challenged in one fashion or another by all of these things?

As we continue to add to our knowledge, will there be a fulcrum, in which the balance is tilted in the other direction?

Will god die by the hand of a more educated man?


Yes?
No?

Why....

 

[HK]

100 years sounds like a long time, but people are living for so long now that my children and definitely my grandchildren would still be alive then - two generations is nowhere near enough time to break the habit of religion.


I do think eventually we may move on from the Gods we currently have. In much the same way that no one worships the old Viking Gods, one day perhaps people will have moved on to something new.


I think though. we're a long way from knowing anywhere near enough about our own universe to be able to definitively say whether there is or isn't a God, and if we can't say for sure either way then there will always be people who believe in something bigger.

 

[Peter Parka]

Can't see belief in god dying but being a member of a church, I can. I know plenty of people who still believe in god but very few who go to church. People are learning to think for themselves more and more and like to make their own mind up about what god requires of them and not be told by some dog collared man what they should and shouldn't be doing. That said, I'm only going by what I see in my own country and in regards to Christianity. It seems that the USA is definately more religious than the UK and also, worldwide, Islam definately seems to be going from strength to strength.

 

[doombug]

Will the expansion of science and knowledge over the next 100 or so years "kill" god?

From Darwin to Einstein to Hawking, advances in science and a deeper understanding of our natural world has challenged the ideology behind the god created man principle. Genesis. The Big Bang, black holes, string theory, quantum mechanics. Is the paradigm of god challenged in one fashion or another by all of these things?

As we continue to add to our knowledge, will there be a fulcrum, in which the balance is tilted in the other direction?

Will god die by the hand of a more educated man?


Yes?
No?

Why....

God hasn't "died" yet. People have attempted to diminish the idea of God by false information but so far there is nothing to disprove God's existence.

 

[zen]

100 years sounds like a long time, but people are living for so long now that my children and definitely my grandchildren would still be alive then - two generations is nowhere near enough time to break the habit of religion.


I do think eventually we may move on from the Gods we currently have. In much the same way that no one worships the old Viking Gods, one day perhaps people will have moved on to something new.


I think though. we're a long way from knowing anywhere near enough about our own universe to be able to definitively say whether there is or isn't a God, and if we can't say for sure either way then there will always be people who believe in something bigger.

Perhaps you are right. 100 years may not be long enough. But, when considering the rate of accelerating returns and the exponential of technological advances, I believe a possibility could occur where within 100 years so much will be discovered and learned, that an unintended consequence may result in a complete re-evaluation of the concept of god and the basis from which religious principles arose. Just fodder for some philosophical thought. I'm not arguing for or against.

 

[Panacea]

No, I don't think god will be obsolete. These characters serve far too many vital purposes in underdeveloped countries. They will not shed them. Do I think developed countries will eventually change the face of their god characters? Yes. It appears atheism will become more common, but I think this could take far more than 100 years for a lot of changes to be seen.

No god is safe from the fickle minds of man

 

[zen]

God hasn't "died" yet. People have attempted to diminish the idea of God by false information but so far there is nothing to disprove God's existence.

Did someone say something? I couldn't quite make that out. What?

 

[savvy]

God hasn't "died" yet. People have attempted to diminish the idea of God by false information but so far there is nothing to disprove God's existence.

I agree. The idea of God has lasted for thousands of years why should 100 more make any difference.

 

[doombug]

I agree. The idea of God has lasted for thousands of years why should 100 more make any difference.

Yeah, ever since religion shut that pesky Galileo up the God concept is safe! hahaha! :24:

 

[satinbutterfly]

No. I think some people need religion/God to feel there is a point to life and to not be so afraid of death.

For instance, if millions of people can ignore the many scientific irregularities in the Bible why would that change 100 years from now?

 

[skywalker]

I really don't see how people can ignore the contradictions science has with the bible and still believe any of it is true.

 

[Panacea]

I really don't see how people can ignore the contradictions science has with the bible and still believe any of it is true.

I think it's perceived as a dangerous slippery slope for the believer to question the bible. Yanno, accept the bible as a work of fiction, by the next morning you'll be a baby eating atheist

 

[satinbutterfly]

I think it's perceived as a dangerous slippery slope for the believer to question the bible. Yanno, accept the bible as a work of fiction, by the next morning you'll be a baby eating atheist

Absolutely. :24:

 

[zen]

I think it's perceived as a dangerous slippery slope for the believer to question the bible. Yanno, accept the bible as a work of fiction, by the next morning you'll be a baby eating atheist

I like my babies broiled with a nice Cabernet....

 

[zen]

I really don't see how people can ignore the contradictions science has with the bible and still believe any of it is true.

This is related in way to the point. Instead of looking at what we know today as compared back to biblical times shall we say, which is huge - project forward, and maybe not 100 years, maybe 200 years, and imagine how much more will become known. Is there a point, where the relationship between humankind and religious tenet become so strained that it collapses?

An example could be, what happens when one of these planets we are discovering almost daily that appears to have all the ingredients to support life, does? And it is robust. Maybe they look like giant squids or cockroaches whatever, but could that challenge a religious belief system? Or lend more credibility?

 

[doombug]

I really don't see how people can ignore the contradictions science has with the bible and still believe any of it is true.

And what contradictions are you talking about? Can you give an example?

 

[Panacea]

I think the history of religion in itself is evidence religion is not likely to take the same shape it has since yahweh's been the Justin Beiber of gods. I just think we can't really know how long that will take, and I would assume it will be a very very long time from now, just because fundamentalists still have such a stranglehold on third world countries, the middle east, and the United States. Going to be hard to mellow those populations out.

 

[skywalker]

That's easy. What about where the bible says the earth is the center of the universe. That is not right.

 

[doombug]

That's easy. What about where the bible says the earth is the center of the universe. That is not right.

You mean geocentrism?

That one is simple: The bible doesn't make that claim. Plato and Aristotle supported this idea as well so it seems to have came from early astronomers observations. What I understand about this is that there are two commonly made observations that supported the idea that the Earth was the center of the Universe. The first observation was that the stars, sun, and planets appear to revolve around the Earth each day, making the Earth the center of that system. Further, every star was on a "stellar" or "celestial" sphere, of which the earth was the center, that rotated each day, using a line through the north and south pole as an axis. The stars closest to the equator appeared to rise and fall the greatest distance, but each star circled back to its rising point each day. The second common notion supporting the geocentric model was that the Earth does not seem to move from the perspective of an Earth bound observer, and that it is solid, stable, and unmoving. In other words, it is completely at rest.

It is more likely an idea that early science has given us.

 

[Johnfromokc]