Popularity of Christianity

In the last century, John Lennon of the Beatles got a lot of hate when he said that they (The Beatles) were more popular than Jesus Christ.  It may have been true, based on the statistics, but Christians are annoyed by this kind of statement regardless of any truth there may be in it.

In the last few days, a CBS News website has been reporting an opinion that in a decade or so, Christianity may not be the majority religion in the USA.  (I don't know whether that prediction counts the Roman Catholics among the Christians--which in my opinion they should--but this time, I expect a little less hate than with John Lennon.)  Christian leaders, some of whom have been drawn to Christian Leadership because of the fame and the financial rewards, have caused the faithful to be disillusioned with their message.  Hordes of former Christians have left organized religion, and sometimes begun to call themselves atheists, or simply said that they belong to no specific religion or denomination.

Even being an atheist, I believe there is still a philosophical role for Christianity to play.  For years, Christian leaders--for their own inscrutable reasons--downplayed the messages in the Sermon on the Mount, and in most of the parables, to focus on a certain defensive attitude towards the religion.  It is more important to defend the religion, they say, than to turn the other cheek.  It is more important, according to some of these leaders, to keep the Leadership in private jets, than to give to the poor.  It is more important, according to some of these leaders, to elect political leaders who support the church, than to elect those whose agendas include helping the poor and the indigent.  I think it is time now, for new church leaders to come forward, who teach the gospel, and the true spirit of the gospel.

Because of the cynicism of our age, there will be few who heed the urging to charity, to the other-centeredness that Jesus taught.  Many will say: Jesus helps those who help themselves.  Many will say: Charity begins at home; we must first help the Christian Leaders, and the money will trickle down to the poor and needy.  But those who are inclined to adopt Christian morality, the Sermon on the Mount, who feel a sense of responsibility to oppose the economics which ensures that some families earn enormous wealth, while other families can hardly exist (after all, the political philosophy of the USA seems to support the view that the extraction of anything the traffic will allow is fine) those of us who abhor this economics that supports those who already have more than they need, we have no philosophical home.  Where can a family turn, so that its children are surrounded with those who feel that they have an obligation to look after their fellow-man, and not just their fellow-family-members?

It is not the habit of atheists to get together on Sundays (or any days, for that matter), to take a holiday from the usual cynicism they find at work.  We don't have feasts, we don't have gatherings--at least I don't think we do; we don't get together enough for me to find out.  We don't have big weddings (but my wife and I did; it was sort of a party!) we don't have big funerals (though when my close friend died a couple of years ago, his former colleagues got together, to reminisce about all his great characteristics.  And there was a lot of food!), atheism is not a social thing.  It could be, I suppose.

Perhaps these mega-churches should fade away.  Some of them are probably doing some good, but a lot of them seem focused on spewing hate against The Left, which is trying to rein in the greed of big businesses, on spewing hate against other religions.  Occasionally, I suspect, spewing hate against the Catholics, and the Pope.  And now: spewing hate against same-sex couples, and anyone in the LGBTQ++ spectrum, and proponents of unisex toilet facilities.  Are there churches that spew hate against electric cars?  I would like to know, so that I can shower ridicule upon them.  I promise to be very gentle.

Arch