Columnist: "World is rapidly becoming all-Christian"

[Unassisted]

This is certainly not a world view that we hear every day.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44309

Welcome to my first column
Posted: May 17, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Jim Rutz

Let's start off with the biggest unknown fact of our time: The world is rapidly becoming all-Christian.

That's not theology or wishful thinking, just statistics. And the numbers are shouting at me. A billion people are going to switch their loyalties to Jesus in the next 11 or 12 years and that may be just the beginning. As you might guess, this megashift could play hob with the citadels of Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism. They might even hit a crashpoint.



It could also virtually wipe out secular humanism, the clueless corps of New-Agers, and the doomed hordes of post-modernists now wandering aimlessly about the wasteland of non-referential abstraction.

How do I reach such far-out conclusions? Am I as fringy as I sound? Let's consult the hard numbers. I'll start with the 20th century:



In 1900, there were 2 million evangelical or charismatic Christians in Africa. By 2000, there were 200 million.
In Latin America during that period, the born-again population zoomed from 1 million to 170 million.
And in China, just since 1950, Christianity has exploded from fewer than a million to almost 120 million.
Do you detect a trend here? If so, congratulations, you're ahead of the New York Times, CNN and the massed legions of academe.

But you may be saying: "Aww, that growth all happened before the '60s, Jim. The world has gone to pot since then."

Ooh, are you wrong.

You've looked just at the Western church, and you've seen a lot of stagnant or shrinking elements (notably liberal Christianity, whose basic tenets are the opposite of the Bible). The liberal collapse has fogged up the whole picture.

Inhale deeply. You're about to see the true figures for the first time:

I have discovered that there is a definable core of the Christian faith that is growing at a white-hot pace – 8 percent a year. If that doesn't sound white-hot to you, consider these details:



This growing heart of the global church is a powerful mix of charismatics, Pentecostals, evangelicals, and a few Catholics. They are in countable networks. In 1970, there were 71 million of them. By 2000, there were 707 million.
Now, straight-line projections are silly because nothing ever goes in a straight line. But just to give you a comically precise picture of our current momentum: At 8 percent growth a year, the world would have more Christians than people by the fall of 2032!
(Many thanks to Todd Johnson, co-author of the standard work in the field, the 14-pound, hernia-inducing "World Christian Encyclopedia," backed by $1.1 billion of research. Dr. Johnson and an associate generously gave me hours of their time to search out and isolate this growing heart phenomenon.)

More: Up until 1960, Western evangelicals outnumbered non-Western evangelicals – mostly Latinos, blacks and Asians – by two to one. Ah, the bad old days. But as of 2000, non-Westerners had shot ahead by four to one. By 2010, it will be seven to one. (From Patrick Johnstone, "The Church Is Bigger Than You Think.") Remember that the next time you hear someone bad-mouth Christianity as the white man's religion.

Never before in history has such a large part of humanity changed its religious loyalties in one century. And it's happening by acclamation, not by force.

So what's going on? How could such a hurricane of change escape notice? What exactly is in back of all this?

Oh, sorry – I'm running out of room. I guess it will have to wait until next week.

But I promise you'll find the events behind my numbers far more astonishing than the numbers themselves. In fact, you'll quickly agree that this movement is going to be much bigger than the Reformation. Even bigger than Wal-Mart.

OK, stop grumbling, I'll give you a hint: My research for my new book, "Megashift (http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1727)," has found 52 countries where God has brought people back from the dead, mostly in the last 20 years. And these are not near-death experiences, where someone on an operating-room table passes out and sees himself going down a long tunnel. These are stone-dead corpses.

Also, for what it's worth, I have zero interest in flying saucers, crop circles, the Bermuda Triangle, the anti-Christ, or the sexual preference of Spongebob Squarepants.

But I am seriously interested in a megashift so life-changing that it dwarfs anything ever seen on this warm green planet. And I think you'll get serious right along with me.

More next Tuesday.

[Mutaman]

I guess it would be asking too much for all these new bible belters to just leave me alone. Oh well, if you can't beat em--- Praise The Lord.

[Rojo]

In Latin America during that period, the born-again population zoomed from 1 million to 170 million.

So he's not talking about the growth of Christianity (Latin America has been Catholic for centuries), but the growth of his own silly version of it.

[Ravenlord]

apperently he doesn't realize that as population goes up over a 100-year period, you're going to have more people believing now than you did then. it's simple math. i can walk down the street and tell you that Piqua Ohio is becoming less Christianized by the minute.

[NJReds]

My research for my new book, "Megashift," has found 52 countries where God has brought people back from the dead, mostly in the last 20 years. And these are not near-death experiences, where someone on an operating-room table passes out and sees himself going down a long tunnel. These are stone-dead corpses.


Hmm...wonder if he could do anything for the Reds bullpen?

Or perhaps rouse Miley from his in-game nap? :evil:

[registerthis]

OK, stop grumbling, I'll give you a hint: My research for my new book, "Megashift," has found 52 countries where God has brought people back from the dead, mostly in the last 20 years. And these are not near-death experiences, where someone on an operating-room table passes out and sees himself going down a long tunnel. These are stone-dead corpses.
Ok, he lost me when I reached this paragraph.

[Ravenlord]

Ok, he lost me when I reached this paragraph.it probably does happen. i've seen other miraculous things happen. problem is, most people think you're just crazy or lying when you tell them about it.

[registerthis]

it probably does happen. i've seen other miraculous things happen. problem is, most people think you're just crazy or lying when you tell them about it.
I've heard of people whose hearts have stopped beating for several minutes suddenly come back to life, it's rare but not unheard of.

But a stone-dead corpse? As in, one who has been dead for some time suddenly coming back to life? That I do not buy. As I read the paragraph, that's what he meant. And I don't believe that.

[Johnny Footstool]

You've looked just at the Western church, and you've seen a lot of stagnant or shrinking elements (notably liberal Christianity, whose basic tenets are the opposite of the Bible). The liberal collapse has fogged up the whole picture.

Two uses of the word "liberal" as an epithet in the same paragraph. Nice. Unfortunately, no definition of what he considers "liberal" Christianity, and no numbers to illustrate its alleged "collapse."

I also like how he claims to provide "statistics," but the numbers are threadbare at best and his manipulation of them is easily unmasked.

Are we supposed to excuse those oversights because of the cop-out title "My First Column?" Sorry, Jim, but if you want to make bold statements, you'd better be able to back them up. Bring your A-game next time.

[Ravenlord]

I've heard of people whose hearts have stopped beating for several minutes suddenly come back to life, it's rare but not unheard of.

But a stone-dead corpse? As in, one who has been dead for some time suddenly coming back to life? That I do not buy. As I read the paragraph, that's what he meant. And I don't believe that.i would assume that's what he meant as well. but where faith is involved....

[Mutaman]

Can He bring the Reds back from the dead?

[Raisor]

So he's not talking about the growth of Christianity (Latin America has been Catholic for centuries), but the growth of his own silly version of it.

thanks so much for calling my faith "silly".

[pedro]

I wonder how that compares the the growth of Islam?

[Falls City Beer]

In a word: non-scientific.

[Falls City Beer]

thanks so much for calling my faith "silly".


"It could also virtually wipe out secular humanism, the clueless corps of New-Agers, and the doomed hordes of post-modernists now wandering aimlessly about the wasteland of non-referential abstraction."

What's good for the goose...

Them's fightin' words: "virtually wipe out secular humanism."

To quote the doyen of the rightsters: "From my cold dead hands!!!!!"

But I'm a secular humanist, I must be clueless.

[M2]

IIRC, Catholicism's seen a massive growth spurt over the past century, as has Islam. Though, wild guess here, but I'll be atheism/agnosticism is the real winner of the past century. It's swept across Europe, it accounts for a quarter of the U.S. popultation and then there's a billion-plus Chinese people to toss into the mix.

[Falls City Beer]

IIRC, Catholicism's seen a massive growth spurt over the past century, as has Islam. Though, wild guess here, but I'll be atheism/agnosticism is the real winner of the past century. It's swept across Europe, it accounts for a quarter of the U.S. popultation and then there's a billion-plus Chinese people to toss into the mix.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. It's losing, like, zero adherents.

Oh, and South America has gained more Protestant adherents than Catholic in the last 10 or so years.

Africa continues to grow both Catholics and Muslims at an un*god*ly rate.

[RedsBaron]

IIRC, Catholicism's seen a massive growth spurt over the past century, as has Islam. Though, wild guess here, but I'll be atheism/agnosticism is the real winner of the past century. It's swept across Europe, it accounts for a quarter of the U.S. popultation and then there's a billion-plus Chinese people to toss into the mix.
I have never read of any study indicating that 25% of the U.S. population is atheistic/agnostic. I agree that a good portion of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. may live their lives as if they do not believe in God and/or are only nominal adherents to their faith, but I've never seen any data to support the assertion that one in four Americans is an atheist or agnostic.

[savafan]

I've heard of people whose hearts have stopped beating for several minutes suddenly come back to life, it's rare but not unheard of.

But a stone-dead corpse? As in, one who has been dead for some time suddenly coming back to life? That I do not buy. As I read the paragraph, that's what he meant. And I don't believe that.

My grandfather was pronounced dead, had stopped breathing and his heart had stopped beating. They were writing up the order at the hospital for his autopsy when a nurse called the doctor into the room. He was dead for ten minutes, and then inexplicably came back to life. He lived three more years after that.

[registerthis]

My grandfather was pronounced dead, had stopped breathing and his heart had stopped beating. They were writing up the order at the hospital for his autopsy when a nurse called the doctor into the room. He was dead for ten minutes, and then inexplicably came back to life. He lived three more years after that.
That's a remarkable story, and, like I said, it happens occasionally.

I believe the columnist was referring to people who have died, and are sitting in the morgue or whatever, suddenly springing back to life. I'm talking dead for hours or days, not minutes.

[Falls City Beer]

I have never read of any study indicating that 25% of the U.S. population is atheistic/agnostic. I agree that a good portion of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. may live their lives as if they do not believe in God and/or are only nominal adherents to their faith, but I've never seen any data to support the assertion that one in four Americans is an atheist or agnostic.

I agree. I seriously doubt 25% of this country would claim themselves agnostic/atheist. I'd say maybe 10% at most.

[Roy Tucker]

Don't know how accurate it is, but http://www.adherents.com/ has some interesting numbers.

[Rojo]

thanks so much for calling my faith "silly".

You're welcome.

The popularity of evangelical Christianity is akin to that of NASCAR -- its not really as popular as it appears when you get out of the South.

[M2]

I have never read of any study indicating that 25% of the U.S. population is atheistic/agnostic. I agree that a good portion of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. may live their lives as if they do not believe in God and/or are only nominal adherents to their faith, but I've never seen any data to support the assertion that one in four Americans is an atheist or agnostic.

U.S. Census runs it at about 15% with no religion specified (which is probably the correct phrase to use). Though what the actual percentage is depends on how broadly you define agnostic. It can mean that you aren't sure if there's a God or it can mean you think there might be a God, but don't particularly think any recognized religion is particularly close to understanding the nature or intent of that God.

If you use the broader definition that group you described could be considered practicing agnostics, i.e. they're not involved in religion at any level. I know population models have been drawn up to estimate the size of the group (using church attendance figures to help create the baseline), the 25% I used was based on some essays I've read on the subject.

Here's the census data:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/04statab/pop.pdf

And here's an interesting overview of religion in the U.S. (pretty much shoots the original article in this thread out of the water):

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tren.htm

[traderumor]

And here's an interesting overview of religion in the U.S. (pretty much shoots the original article in this thread out of the water):I thought the author did just fine on his own. His endeavor never defined "Christianity." Unless you do that, any numbers or other grandiose claims are meaningless.

[Az Red]

First question that should be asked: "Why did he write this article?

Answer: "Sell more books"

If he spells it all out in a 'free' story, no one will need to buy his book.

I find this type of data (unfortunately just like religion itself) open for interpretation. Proclaimed Christians are very different from practicing Christians. If you are one to put faith in the New Testement then you may believe that the world is destined to get worse, not better and then this article and book are only a source of false optimism. I believe it is awesome that more people are putting their faith in Jesus Christ but honestly, it is only God who knows if it is a genuine change.

[WVRed]

The popularity of evangelical Christianity is akin to that of NASCAR -- its not really as popular as it appears when you get out of the South.

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prob’ly run for President of the Southern State.
The day Elvis passed away would be our national holiday,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

I'd make my Supreme Court down in Texas,
And we wouldn't have no killers gettin’off free.
If they were proven guilty, then they would swing quickly,
Instead of writin’ books and smilin’ on T.V.

We'd all learn Cajun cookin in Louisiana,
And I'd put that capitol back in Alabama.
We'd put Florida on the right track ‘cause, we'd take Miami back,
And throw all them pushers in the slammer.

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prolly run for President of the Southern States.
The day young Skynyrd died we’d show our Southern Pride,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

:)

[Mutaman]

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prob’ly run for President of the Southern State.
The day Elvis passed away would be our national holiday,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

I'd make my Supreme Court down in Texas,
And we wouldn't have no killers gettin’off free.
If they were proven guilty, then they would swing quickly,
Instead of writin’ books and smilin’ on T.V.

We'd all learn Cajun cookin in Louisiana,
And I'd put that capitol back in Alabama.
We'd put Florida on the right track ‘cause, we'd take Miami back,
And throw all them pushers in the slammer.

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prolly run for President of the Southern States.
The day young Skynyrd died we’d show our Southern Pride,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

:)





For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it's still not yet two oclock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets and his hat in one hand probably and his sword in the other looking up the hill waiting for Longstreet to give the word and it's all in the balance, it hasn't happened yet, it hasn't even begun yet, it not only hasn't begun yet but there is stll time for it not to begin against that position and those circumstances which made more men than Garnett and Kemper and Armstead and Wilcox look grave yet it's going to begin, we all know that, we have come too far with too much at stake and that moment doesn't need even a fourteen-year-old boy to think This time. Maybe this time with all this much to lose and all this much to gain: Pennsylvania, Maryland, the world, the golden dome of Washington itself to crown with desperate and unbelievable victory the desperate gamble, the cast made two years ago....

(Intruder in the Dust)

[M2]

Hey WV, you come from a state that split off from the south to join the winning side. If the south had won, you'd be VRed.

[WVRed]

Hey WV, you come from a state that split off from the south to join the winning side. If the south had won, you'd be VRed.

Im technically from Kentucky, which never really had a side in the war.

I was in Alabama back in September. Walking into a Cracker Barrel down there and listening to the Southern girls talk is well worth it. You can probably lump Tennessee and Mississippi in there as well.

[Rojo]

My family's lineage in Georgia goes back for literally centuries. Some of my ancestors died fighting for the CSA. I was born in South Carolina -- the first state to succeed.

And I think the good guys won.

[Falls City Beer]

Hey WV, you come from a state that split off from the south to join the winning side. If the south had won, you'd be VRed.

If the South had won, there would not have been a Union; this country would have been a backwater conquered by Germany in the 1910s. What makes this country great prevailed in 1865; what would have made it unsustainable lost.

[traderumor]

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prob’ly run for President of the Southern State.
The day Elvis passed away would be our national holiday,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

I'd make my Supreme Court down in Texas,
And we wouldn't have no killers gettin’off free.
If they were proven guilty, then they would swing quickly,
Instead of writin’ books and smilin’ on T.V.

We'd all learn Cajun cookin in Louisiana,
And I'd put that capitol back in Alabama.
We'd put Florida on the right track ‘cause, we'd take Miami back,
And throw all them pushers in the slammer.

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prolly run for President of the Southern States.
The day young Skynyrd died we’d show our Southern Pride,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

:)Toby Keith? :evil:

[WVRed]

Toby Keith? :evil:

Hank Williams Jr.

[M2]

Im technically from Kentucky, which never really had a side in the war.

Um, except for it being part of the Union. I'm sure Kentuckians fought on both sides, but the state itself stuck with the North.

[KittyDuran]

If the South had won, there would not have been a Union; this country would have been a backwater conquered by Germany in the 1910s. What makes this country great prevailed in 1865; what would have made it unsustainable lost.I'm sure that Europe was looking at the Civil War with great interest [i.e. licking their chops, very much as they were during the Revolution]- and didn't England do some trading with the confederacy? If the Union was lost, IMHO England would have tried again to invade and conquer. :(

[KittyDuran]

Um, except for it being part of the Union. I'm sure Kentuckians fought on both sides, but the state itself stuck with the North.I think Kentucky was a border state officially siding with the Union. All I know is that all my ancestors fought for the Union as did most of Eastern Kentucky.

[Rojo]

Some states like Kentucky were county-by-county in their allegiances. Basically, loyalties followed economics. Slave/plantation economies went full force for the succession while the hard-scrabble farmers of mountain regions weren't about to risk their son's lives preserving the big planter's wealth.

[RedsBaron]

I've read that Kentucky was officially "neutral" early in the Civil War. After a Confderate army invaded Kentucky, this helped push Kentucky more firmly into the Union camp. Lincoln had wisely respected Kentucky "neutrality" up to then and had not stationed a Union army there (I'm doing this by memory, so I may have my facts wrong).
Of course, as a border state, plenty of Kentuckians fought for the Union and plenty fought for the Confedracy.
As for West Virginia, a cousin of mine did a family history of the Crabtrees, from whom I am descended on my maternal grandmother's side. I found it fascinating to read of my ancestors who fought in the Civil War. I literally read of fathers and sons on opposite sides in the war, of brother against brother.

[RedsBaron]

If the South had won, there would not have been a Union; this country would have been a backwater conquered by Germany in the 1910s. What makes this country great prevailed in 1865; what would have made it unsustainable lost.
I very much doubt that the German Empire could have conquered the Confederate States of America in the 1910s. Had the Confederacy survived, it quite probably would have had a quite capable army in that decade, given the probable animosity which would have still existed between it and the United States-perception that you have an enemy on your border often concentrates the mind when it comes to maintaining a strong defense. More importantly, Germany never had the naval ability in the 1910s to project force across the Atlantic Ocean and mount an invasion here. The British navy almost certainly would have sent any German invasion fleet to the bottom of the Atlantic.
That said, a divided America, especially if the USA and CSA viewed each other as an enemy, could have affected American intervention in World War I. Absent American involvement with the Allies, the German offensive in 1918 might have succeeded. A German victory in that war would have been a bad outcome, both for Western Europe and America.
Even worse would have been the possible effect upon World War II had America been divided into two nations in 1941. Would the USA and CSA have both intervened to fight the Third Reich?

[RedsBaron]

I'm sure that Europe was looking at the Civil War with great interest [i.e. licking their chops, very much as they were during the Revolution]- and didn't England do some trading with the confederacy? If the Union was lost, IMHO England would have tried again to invade and conquer. :(
With all respect, I doubt it. France was unable to sustain its meddling in Mexico following the Civil War, and Mexico was much weaker militarily than either the North or the South would have been after 1865, even as separate nations. Great Britian may have tried to gain what it could diplomatically from a divided America, but conquering North or South was beyond British power by that time IMO.

[KronoRed]

Two country's would not have survived, one or both would have fallen to a coup of some sort, outside influence or further civil war, North America would have become a bunch of bankrupt little countries, till we were all overrun by the Nazis or the Russians

IMO

[RedsBaron]

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prob’ly run for President of the Southern State.
The day Elvis passed away would be our national holiday,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

I'd make my Supreme Court down in Texas,
And we wouldn't have no killers gettin’off free.
If they were proven guilty, then they would swing quickly,
Instead of writin’ books and smilin’ on T.V.

We'd all learn Cajun cookin in Louisiana,
And I'd put that capitol back in Alabama.
We'd put Florida on the right track ‘cause, we'd take Miami back,
And throw all them pushers in the slammer.

If the South would’ve won we'd a had it made,
I'd prolly run for President of the Southern States.
The day young Skynyrd died we’d show our Southern Pride,
If the South would a won we'd had a it made.

:)
I remember this song, which was not one of Hank Williams Junior's better efforts.
I also found the line about the South having a national holiday on the day Elvis died, or the day Skynyrd died, or the day Hank Senior died, to be strange. When have we ever had a holiday on the day any hero died? We've had federal and state holidays on the dates that Washington and Lincoln and King and Lee were born, but not on the date they died. It would sound creepy to me to have a holiday on the date someone died.

[RedsBaron]

Two country's would not have survived, one or both would have fallen to a coup of some sort, outside influence or further civil war, North America would have become a bunch of bankrupt little countries, till we were all overrun by the Nazis or the Russians

IMO
The Confedracy would have had real problems surviving as a unified nation; the individual states in the Confederacy couldn't even unite in their war effort against the North.
However, while I agree that a splintered America would have been tragic, I believe the North would have still held together as a nation, even without the South. A lot of boys in Union blue died to protect the concept of the Union, which had an almost sacred meaning to some.

[Falls City Beer]

I very much doubt that the German Empire could have conquered the Confederate States of America in the 1910s. Had the Confederacy survived, it quite probably would have had a quite capable army in that decade, given the probable animosity which would have still existed between it and the United States-perception that you have an enemy on your border often concentrates the mind when it comes to maintaining a strong defense. More importantly, Germany never had the naval ability in the 1910s to project force across the Atlantic Ocean and mount an invasion here. The British navy almost certainly would have sent any German invasion fleet to the bottom of the Atlantic.
That said, a divided America, especially if the USA and CSA viewed each other as an enemy, could have affected American intervention in World War I. Absent American involvement with the Allies, the German offensive in 1918 might have succeeded. A German victory in that war would have been a bad outcome, both for Western Europe and America.
Even worse would have been the possible effect upon World War II had America been divided into two nations in 1941. Would the USA and CSA have both intervened to fight the Third Reich?

Well, it's all conjecture. Suffice it to say, the Civil War was one of those "it would have happened anyway" kind of things; the South was intransigently opposed to modernization; the North was leaving the South in the Stone Age intellectually, financially, infrastructurally. The South's business model sunk them, not their military tactics. The hammer merely needed to fall. A couple of wackos in Kansas brushed that hammer one too many times.

[Larkin411]

"It could also virtually wipe out secular humanism, the clueless corps of New-Agers, and the doomed hordes of post-modernists now wandering aimlessly about the wasteland of non-referential abstraction. "

Oh man that article gave me a good laugh. I'm not sure if I'm what this author would deem a post-modernist but I do like the idea of describing myself as wandering aimlessly about a wasteland of non-referential abstraction. I bet there's a member of Islam writing the same thing somewhere.

[GAC]

As a Christian I simply shake my head at this article and don't believe it at all. They say it's based on statistically collected data. I'd like to know what the criteria was that they used to define Christian. It's a term that has been given such a broad meaning any more - almost watered down.

I no more believe this then when someone says this is a Christian nation.