Why do Christians become Christians?

[Pat Mustard]

Even more amusing is the fact that our motto read E Pluribus Unum prior to that change, which means "out of many, one", meaning that again, the Christians managed to divide our nation with their attempts to increase the theocracy level of our secular government.

I always found the best thing about E Plvribvs Vnvm (Romans couldn't write u's) was that it looks to have been taken by a recipe by Virgil for salad dressing.

[Pat Mustard]

Buddhism got started as a rejection of the Hinduism it was spawned from.

You do realise that Buddhism is at least 100 years older than Hinduism? They both come from similar base traditions, but while Buddhism was in all likelihood a unified religion from the start (c600BCE), Hinduism was a synthesis of different traditions and religions, likely starting at around 400BCE and not finalised into anything like its current form until 500CE.

[SteveII]

delete--lost my whole response.

[Brian37]

Buddhism got started as a rejection of the Hinduism it was spawned from.

You do realise that Buddhism is at least 100 years older than Hinduism? They both come from similar base traditions, but while Buddhism was in all likelihood a unified religion from the start (c600BCE), Hinduism was a synthesis of different traditions and religions, likely starting at around 400BCE and not finalised into anything like its current form until 500CE.

I think that depends on which sect of either you ask. But their shared history still existed in the same area and the overlap is obvious. The evidence shows that they arose from the same ideas.

Brahmaism is older than Buddhism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma It says that the first depictions were Vedic in nature and 1,000 years BCE.

 One of the earliest mention of Brahma with Vishnu and Shiva is in the fifth Prapathaka (lesson) of the Maitrayaniya Upanishad, probably composed in late 1st millennium BCE. Brahma is discussed in verse 5,1 also called the Kutsayana Hymn first, and expounded in verse 5,2.[20][21]   

That's older than both the numbers you gave.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_Hinduism

[Brian37]

But still does not matter if one rejects Brahma being the creator god, the first Buddha is rooted in mythology, and no one human is born to bring peace or wisdom to the world regardless. Both are still religions and no religion for that matter owns a patent on our species morality.

[Angrboda]

Conversion experiences like this have more to do with the nature of human psychology than the message being promoted.  The great tent revivals preached a far less 'friendly' message than contemporary revivals do, but the atmosphere was the same.  Hysteria and group think are not good reasons to adopt any belief.

Can you name some other examples that would illustrate your point that the message is not important? Hysteria and group think might come into play while one is at the meeting, but what accounts for days and years later when most are still Christians?

Once the switch is thrown, it tends to remain that way. That's just the way hysterical conversion works.

[Brian37]

I've noticed over the years that some people (I'm not pointing fingers) do not see a difference between "religion" and "my religion", when it comes to what should and shouldn't be allowed. "Other religions" are just misguided fools of no significance.

I think you are right. Religions freedom should not be limited to Christians.

But what that freedom that should be extended to everyone should not be taken as the freedom to set up a social pecking order where one religion drives the bus and all others are mere guests. Government neutrality is the only thing that keeps the west more civil.

[robvalue]

I've noticed over the years that some people (I'm not pointing fingers) do not see a difference between "religion" and "my religion", when it comes to what should and shouldn't be allowed. "Other religions" are just misguided fools of no significance.

I think you are right. Religions freedom should not be limited to Christians.

Great! I'm glad we agree here

[Mister Agenda]

Has anyone ever "come to Jesus" without having heard about him and the stories surrounding him for long periods?

I think not. The seeping in of ideas surrounding you is not surprising. People independently describing "meeting" Jesus, while isolated from any mention of him, would be surprising.

In short, people are very susceptible to the appeal to popularity fallacy. If many people seem to believe it, it appears a reasonable belief.

Yes, of course they have. As an example, Billy Graham has spoken to millions of people in large events specifically designed to reach unbelievers. They respond to the message by the thousands--many with discussions and conversions on the spot. People who do profess or who are interested in learning more are assigned to a local church for followup.

You seem to be using the term 'unbeliever' EXTREMELY loosely.

[Mister Agenda]

So, how large does a pool have to be before hundreds of millions of people are not an exception? 

Okay, say we take the US statistic of 85% of Christians were born into a Christian home. You are claiming that these people only stay because of the "brainwashing" they received as children. The 15% adult conversions are exceptions. You are also concluding that the message that Christianity is a con (or however you want to characterize it) and science can prove it is not working on (319 million US population x 70.6% Christians = 225 million x 85% born into Christian homes) = 191 million people. And this is in the wealthiest country with cast amounts of information available to anyone with access to a computer (to say nothing about the education system's attempt to undermine faith). 

I don't think the numbers support your conclusion.

You don't even know what it's a pool of. You pointed out yourself that a lot of Nones are just unaffiliated generic Christians. 'Only went to church several times a year as a child' isn't the same thing as 'raised without exposure to Christianity'. Frankly, exposure at a young age is almost impossible to avoid in a country with such a large majority of Christians.

And you're losing Christians faster than you're replacing them, except in developing countries, where Islam is also rapidly increasing, and incidentally, where Christians tend to have large families, too.

We can't know if 'being drawn to Christianity' is significant if we don't have much understanding of the pool they're drawn from.