Decline of christianity in the united states

[Grace]

I’m not suspicious. I'm observant. I notice patterns. I notice contradiction. I value clarity.

People often like to hide what they're really saying. You tend to write in this obtuse, stream of consciousness, highly spiritualized way that makes it hard to understand or pin down what you actually believe. Like I said earlier, arguing with you is like arguing with a fog. I feel like your writing conceals as much as it reveals.

Now, I'm not going to speculate about why you write like this, but the impact of your words matter, regardless of your intent.

So for example, you denied the existence of the Black Church. You called the Civil Rights Movement a "government experiment." You framed it with spiritual language about unity and trusting God, but that framing doesn't erase its implications. The effect of your words is historical erasure. They are denying the existence of an entire Christian theological and cultural tradition. By saying that the Black Church should have trusted God and waited instead of protesting, your words are telling an oppressed group of people that they shouldn't have resisted their oppression.

People often like to hide in plain sight.
They often use spiritual language to protect themselves from criticism, especially when what they're saying is provocative.
So honestly, I don't think you're a bad person, but I do think your words matter and I think it's okay to examine your words and discern what they mean.

...I think you are erasing the experiences of real people, real suffering and real theology, regardless of your intentions.

This isn't an attack against you or your character. I don't know what your motives or intentions are. All I know is what your words are doing and I think I'm holding a mirror up and honestly pointing out what they mean.

Take that mirror, turn it around and look at yourself first.

[Szdfan]

I’m not suspicious. I'm observant. I notice patterns. I notice contradiction. I value clarity.

People often like to hide what they're really saying. You tend to write in this obtuse, stream of consciousness, highly spiritualized way that makes it hard to understand or pin down what you actually believe. Like I said earlier, arguing with you is like arguing with a fog. I feel like your writing conceals as much as it reveals.

Now, I'm not going to speculate about why you write like this, but the impact of your words matter, regardless of your intent.

So for example, you denied the existence of the Black Church. You called the Civil Rights Movement a "government experiment." You framed it with spiritual language about unity and trusting God, but that framing doesn't erase its implications. The effect of your words is historical erasure. They are denying the existence of an entire Christian theological and cultural tradition. By saying that the Black Church should have trusted God and waited instead of protesting, your words are telling an oppressed group of people that they shouldn't have resisted their oppression.

People often like to hide in plain sight.
They often use spiritual language to protect themselves from criticism, especially when what they're saying is provocative.
So honestly, I don't think you're a bad person, but I do think your words matter and I think it's okay to examine your words and discern what they mean.

...I think you are erasing the experiences of real people, real suffering and real theology, regardless of your intentions.

This isn't an attack against you or your character. I don't know what your motives or intentions are. All I know is what your words are doing and I think I'm holding a mirror up and honestly pointing out what they mean.

Take that mirror, turn it around and look at yourself first.

I do, actually. I spend a lot of time reflecting on what I write here.

[Bootstrap]

I remember when Obama was president the “Reverend” he sat under for 20 years. The video clips of this man’s messages seemed extremely political & radical. It was one of the huge red flags about Obama.

https://www.politico.com/story/2008/03/ ... ory-009051

We have a black church in our town. Sometimes blacks are prejudiced against whites. During the BLM days I had 2 regular customers that were black that were hateful to me as a cashier yet I have good relationships with many blacks.

The only time I was threatened to be beat up was by a group of black girls who wanted my money (I was 14) and they circled around me but thankfully one of them told them to leave her alone.

Thanks, Valerie. I actually agree with you that Jeremiah Wright’s rhetoric in some of those clips was extreme and not in the same spirit as the Civil Rights leaders I was talking about. What made leaders like Dr. King so powerful wasn’t anger or blame—it was deep biblical conviction, courageous love, and a willingness to suffer for justice without returning hate for hate. That’s not the same as what we sometimes see today, on either side of the political spectrum.

But just as some voices in the Black church have gone too far at times, we also need to recognize that white churches have had their own history of extremism—like the way some openly supported the KKK or preached segregation as God's will. Even now, there are churches where anti-immigrant or racist ideas are wrapped in religious language. That is also part of the "Decline of Christianity in the U.S."—when churches forget the gospel and become mouthpieces for fear, division, or power.

What we need—what the Civil Rights movement at its best showed—is a church that truly trusts God, stands for justice, and walks humbly. That’s the Christianity I long to see more of.

[Bootstrap]

Take that mirror, turn it around and look at yourself first.

A good reminder for all of us—it's important to live up to our own standards, and it's easy to spot others' hypocrisy while overlooking our own.

That said, the "mirror" metaphor can sometimes feel like a cliché, and at times it's used to deflect from real accountability. Maybe it would carry more weight if we shared how we’re applying it to ourselves before turning it on others.

[Thomas_muntzer]

I would venture that a mosque probably has teachings closer to biblical truth than an Episcopalian church.

Just saying.

I Must agree with you many churches don't follow biblical principles

[Szdfan]

Take that mirror, turn it around and look at yourself first.

A good reminder for all of us—it's important to live up to our own standards, and it's easy to spot others' hypocrisy while overlooking our own.

That said, the "mirror" metaphor can sometimes feel like a cliché, and at times it's used to deflect from real accountability. Maybe it would carry more weight if we shared how we’re applying it to ourselves before turning it on others.

I'll go first.

Here is how I understand myself — I'm observant. I notice patterns. I notice contradiction. I care deeply about history and see how things that happen today connect with the past. I value clarity. I value honesty, even when it's hard.

I also overthink. I overanalyze. I question and examine my own motives. I rewrite posts several times before I click submit.

I think language matters. I don't like euphemism, obfuscation, and vibes-driven spirituality. I want to cut through it all and ask, what are you really saying? I think that accidentally causes conflict even when I'm not trying to. I just want people to mean what they say and say what they mean.

I can be bratty. I intentionally poke sometimes, but I'm not doing it just to troll. I'm trying to get to something true.

I care deeply about people, but I'm not good with social games and surface-level niceties. I understand patterns and systems better than I understand people. I often feel socially awkward.

When I'm having conflict with others on here, I'm not trying to humiliate or score points. I'm trying to get to the truth. But I also know that my style can come off as intense or unrelenting and that can be hard for people.

I'm not trying to be mean or cruel, but I think I upset and unnerve people because I don't just accept face value, but I keep digging deeper and sometimes digging causes conflict.

[Bootstrap]

Take that mirror, turn it around and look at yourself first.

A good reminder for all of us—it's important to live up to our own standards, and it's easy to spot others' hypocrisy while overlooking our own.

That said, the "mirror" metaphor can sometimes feel like a cliché, and at times it's used to deflect from real accountability. Maybe it would carry more weight if we shared how we’re applying it to ourselves before turning it on others.

I'll go first.

Here is how I understand myself — I'm observant. I notice patterns. I notice contradiction. I care deeply about history and see how things that happen today connect with the past. I value clarity. I value honesty, even when it's hard.

I also overthink. I overanalyze. I question and examine my own motives. I rewrite posts several times before I click submit.

I think language matters. I don't like euphemism, obfuscation, and vibes-driven spirituality. I want to cut through it all and ask, what are you really saying? I think that accidentally causes conflict even when I'm not trying to. I just want people to mean what they say and say what they mean.

I can be bratty. I intentionally poke sometimes, but I'm not doing it just to troll. I'm trying to get to something true.

I care deeply about people, but I'm not good with social games and surface-level niceties. I understand patterns and systems better than I understand people. I often feel socially awkward.

When I'm having conflict with others on here, I'm not trying to humiliate or score points. I'm trying to get to the truth. But I also know that my style can come off as intense or unrelenting and that can be hard for people.

I'm not trying to be mean or cruel, but I think I upset and unnerve people because I don't just accept face value, but I keep digging deeper and sometimes digging causes conflict.

Thank you for sharing so honestly and clearly—I do think this captures where you're coming from.

But I’ve noticed that threads on MN often drift in a familiar way. We start with a question like “Why is Christianity in the U.S. in decline?” and before long, we’re talking about ourselves—who’s good, who’s bad, who’s self-aware, who’s not. The original topic gets lost.

Self-reflection a good thing. But I wonder if that pattern says something about where Christianity is in this country. Maybe part of the problem is that we’ve turned inward—toward personality, performance, and division—instead of outward, toward being the Church, the hands and feet of Jesus in the world. Maybe the patterns we see in discussions here are just a mirror of the decline of Christianity in the United States.

What do you think? How does all this connect to the bigger picture of where the Church is heading—or where it’s called to be?

[JohnH]

Szdfan,

It usually feels when I’m interacting with you like you’re trying to “trick” me into saying something hateful or offensive, as if out of a misguided mission to prove what I “really” believe.

It was particularly notable in this thread. I think you think I believe in something called “Christian nationalism”; I am not even sure what that is, and I have zero desire to learn any more about it than, say, Swedenborgianism.

I posted Bible verses in response to “What is a Christian nation?”, hoping to stimulate discussion of what that actually is. You responded with posts accusing me of promoting Christian nationalism when all I did was post a few Bible verses.

I think it would be a good idea for you to spend some time reflecting on why I feel you are so dead-set on believing I believe in certain ideologies and then trying to prove that in a public forum.

[JohnH]

But I’ve noticed that threads on MN often drift in a familiar way. We start with a question like “Why is Christianity in the U.S. in decline?” and before long, we’re talking about ourselves—who’s good, who’s bad, who’s self-aware, who’s not. The original topic gets lost.

I tried to steer the discussion to what a Christian nation actually is; the conversation instead got detoured by Szdfan who accused me of promoting Christian nationalism. It’s not worthwhile to hold discussion with someone else who has already decided what you believe, and wishes to argue with that made-up caricature of a person.

I was hoping the Bible’s teachings of a Christian nation could be contrasted with the American nation-state and also the peoples who make up America. But that never happened. Instead, I got put on trial again.

[Bootstrap]

Szdfan,

It usually feels when I’m interacting with you like you’re trying to “trick” me into saying something hateful or offensive, as if out of a misguided mission to prove what I “really” believe.

It was particularly notable in this thread. I think you think I believe in something called “Christian nationalism”; I am not even sure what that is, and I have zero desire to learn any more about it than, say, Swedenborgianism.

I posted Bible verses in response to “What is a Christian nation?”, hoping to stimulate discussion of what that actually is. You responded with posts accusing me of promoting Christian nationalism when all I did was post a few Bible verses.

I think it would be a good idea for you to spend some time reflecting on why I feel you are so dead-set on believing I believe in certain ideologies and then trying to prove that in a public forum.

I wonder if we can move away from accusations and getting personal in unhelpful ways, and maybe return to the topic.

You mentioned posting Bible verses to explore what a Christian nation could or should look like—maybe we could revisit that? I'd be interested in hearing how you see those Scriptures shaping our understanding of the Church’s role in society today.

What does it look like, in your view, for Christians to live faithfully in a nation that’s increasingly post-Christian?