From “First Things” —
[T]here were, on average, 270 new Christian martyrs every 24 hours over the past decade, such that “the number of martyrs [in the period 2000-2010] was approximately 1 million.” Compare this to an estimated 34,000 Christian martyrs in 1900.
Africa has been the most stunning area of Christian growth over the past century. There were 8.7 million African Christians in 1900 (primarily in Egypt, Ethiopia and South Africa); there are 475 million African Christians today and their numbers are projected to reach 670 million by 2025. Another astonishing growth spurt, measured typologically, has been among Pentecostals and charismatics: 981,000 in 1900; 612,472,000 in 2011, with an average of 37,000 new adherents every day—the fastest growth in two millennia of Christian history.
As for the quest for Christian unity: There were 1,600 Christian denominations in 1900; there were 18,800 in 1970; and there are 42,000 today.
Other impressive numbers: $545 billion is given to Christian causes annually, which comes out to $1.5 billion per day. … 71,425,000 Bibles will be distributed this year, and some 2 billion people will tune in at least once a month to Christian radio or television. 7.1 million books about Christianity will be published this year, compared to 1.8 million in 1970.
And get this —
As of mid-2011, there will be an average of 80,000 new Christians per day (of whom 31,000 will be Catholics) and 79,000 new Muslims per day, but 300 fewer atheists every 24 hours.
Question: How can we reconcile the increasing Christian disunity, evidenced by so many denominations, with the growth of Christianity?
Question: Why is atheism in numerical decline?
It's much more complex than what I'm about to write, but fundamentally, it's about law. New denominations come into existence to take doctrinal positions that are in contrast with other denominations. Sometimes denominations come into being to satisfy the egos of their leadership.
But fundamentally, it's like a disagreement over what rules one must follow to be saved … thus completely missing the grace and forgiveness of salvation.
If the human community really believed in the grace, love and forgiveness of Jesus, denominational lines would be less significant and eventually disappear.
The weakness of the atheist position is that it claims to be built on science and fact, but on fundamental questions it is unsatisfying. And on ultimate scientific questions, such as the origins of the world, science relies on pure conjecture regarding how it happened.
Jesus is never referred to as the past Jesus or the late Jesus. He has never been by anyone or at any time.
I was reminded of this by a grandchild of 7 yesterday. Out of the mouth of babes.
WE can build on that for unity.
I just read a very interesting book called "Mission after Christendom." One of its main points was that the church isn't dying – it is exploding, but it is doing so in the "global south" and through reverse mission via migratory patterns from the global south to the global north.
Hence the massive Episcopal church in downtown Boston that sits empty and unused is surrounded by 70 small but bursting "churches" that meet in stores, in gymnasiums, in homes – and that the numbers in the small churches dwarf those who have left the mainline churches. However, since those people are poor, are immigrants, and live "under the radar", we don't hear about this massive growth.
Other possible influences on this would be racial and pentecostal prejudices, as well as post-colonial and patriarchal influences, as most of the global south are people of color and have a highly emotive pentecostal approach to Christianity which is difficult for us northern, white, "traditional" believers to incorporate.
Anyway, it was refreshing to see how the Spirit continues to move and continues to lift up the oppressed, to free the prisoner, and to bring life to where none was before!!
The number of Christians grows because of the message of the Gospel – it really is good news and people want good news.
The number of each of the current denominations has people, otherwise known as sinners, in them.
Too many typos…
The number of the denominations grows because the current denominations all have people, otherwise known as sinners, in them. Sinners tend to be quite annoying at times.
It would be interesting to see how they define a separate denomination…Is it just in name only? One of the fastest growing segments according to a Barna study I saw was "community" churches with no denominational affiliation at all..Wonder if they are considered in this study as a separate entity??
David, I would agree with your assessment that the atheist lifestyle is unrewarding but I might take some exception with your comment on scientific review if I understood it correctly. I believe science has the privilege of working with God's immutable laws of physics, etc., that point, according to the Bible, to the very existence of God..The more science uncovers, the more we find a Bible that spoke accurately if not INDIRECTLY to the creation of the world. It appears that the conclusion of many a scientific mind is that the universe and it's various components seem to be the result of intelligent design rather than random chance. The definition of what that intelligent designer might look like varies but at least it begins a discussion in an otherwise atheistic mindset..
Plus, I just believe that man has in him an inner "homing beacon" that searches for it's creator. It can be ignored but it can't be turned off….
Price, I agree.
From the perspective of being "one of those scientists," I have observed that in considerations about God's involvement in the physical realm, almost 99% of the time, when a person examines the "evidence," they only prove for themselves the conclusion that they started with.
If an atheist reviews the scientific evidence that could be interpreted to favor random evolution, that person will conclude that the data disprove God.
If a believer looks at the evidence with a bent to combat the view of the atheist instead of being objective about the data, that person might come up with all sorts of distortions of "scientific law" to explain why certain things had to happen in a certain way. The earth has to be 6000 years old, there had to be a world-wide flood, a snake used to have legs, etc.
If someone reads Romans 1:20 that 'God's invisible [i.e., spiritual realm] qualities can be understood from what He has created' and takes that verse literally, many analogies between principles in the physical and spiritual realms open up. There are countless principles of physiology, genetics, chemistry, and physics in the Bible, and understanding this helps see the spiritual nature of God in the things He has made.
For instance, Paul's saying that "sowing to the flesh reaps corruption," is a statement that is consistent with the physical Second Law of Thermodynamics. The 2nd law of entropy says (loosely) 'energy in the natural realm is going downhill, and if you decide to act out of the flesh, that's where you are going also.' That is the way God set it up at Creation.
Not all of the time, but most of the time, people retain their preconceptions throughout a supposedly "objective" review of the evidence so that they end up "proving" what they already believed was true before they even started.
Just read the endless back and forth posts on this site about the IM/AC issue and try to determine if anyone is learning anything or is everyone just arguing the same thing over and over. People have only defended their preconceived conclusions. What is accomplished other than an increase in entropy?
I would suggest that atheism is in decline because of the increase in detailed knowledge of how things work. Genetics and biochemistry have revealed just how incredibly detailed Darwin's Black Box really is. It just makes less and less sense to believe in materialism.
I suspect one reason for the decline of atheism is the decline in officially atheistic governments. Those governments that have adopted atheism as a state religion have not fared well.