Dissipated Energy- The Collapse of Religion

How the Inverse Square Law predicts the death of religion

The Inverse Square Law of physics adequately and scientifically describes the deterioration process and the impending collapse of monotheistic religion as a principle of sound hypothesis.

The fact that Christianity is no longer practiced anyway—they now have shifted to just reading books and watching videos, the speed of collapse is following the inverse square law, where as the Christian wanders farther from the source of power, the dissipation or weakening of faith and effectiveness is squared.

So, as the field increases, the weakness and scope of the field follows a predictable trajectory.

And as the source energy is diluted, chaos ensues at an accelerated rate as electromagnetic fields dissipate. Miracles have ceased (ITEWO).

As you can currently see, no Christians worship the same god and all have there own “pick and choose” methodology, confirming that the source is no longer relevant or in association with the believer (if it ever was).

Soon, in-identity to the source is inevitable and the second law of thermodynamics is a type and shadow of any dying religion, plant, animal, mineral, or any dogma or idea. The collapse began when it all started, and we are now seeing the signs accelerating toward total entropy. Unless there is a new outside force to influence a reboot, the end is in our sights. Sooner than later I hope.

Author: jim-

One minute info blogs breaking the faith trap.

101 thoughts on “Dissipated Energy- The Collapse of Religion”

  1. Hey jim, I like the post. I think that you can see the effect, that you were talking about in almost every world view system. In both short and long term observations. A long term example is, Hinduism, they have expanded the amount of gods they exsept, to the point that you don’t even need a god anymore. This however took thousands of years for them to reach. A short term example, is a chronological reading of the Qur’an, it goes from a, love everyone religion to a kill everyone religion, within the lifetime of the writer.
    As you probably have guessed I think that Christianity does not fit this pattern. This is where I’m coming from. Christianity, historically followed the patter you where talking about. Until the protestant reformation, since then we have been reversing the patter. Over the years we have been getting closer to the original text material and not further. I do agree that there are changes that happen in the short term, you have some examples. However from where I’m standing christianty does not seem to fallow that pattern of chang, you where talking about. Historically, It seems to be movie back to its original material.
    If you have any thoughts on this I would apreasheat reading your perspective. Thanks

    Liked by 1 person

    1. No deep breath this time Dave. You are seeing what you have been primed to see. Ontology is a shell game and the farther one goes back the more disoriented they become to the religion. It is a great goal (it seems) until you consider the sources and the findings. Paul’s own teachings are in opposition to the Synoptics, as well as James and all are laced with forgeries and on it goes. Faith sets one in a lifelong journey of tail chasing.
      Do you know why the first ecumenical council was called? They no longer knew the nature of god. They never did agree, because they never knew at all. These are people supposedly laced with gnosis, and there was no answers but by committee and cleverly worded, confusing conclusions. Ontology will however, turn you into a deist or atheist by the time you are done. It is the only way to make it make sense. I’ve seen several try, and in the end they profess Christ but everything else, but in every other statement, not a chance. The only way to close the gaps is by willful dismissal of contradiction.
      Your attempt at chronology here is a nice try, but you leave out what suits the faith. The origins of Judaism are a bloodthirsty mess. Then all along the way anyone with any opposition was destroyed by the best of their ability. Then along comes Jesus (or did he?) and a few neat sayings, but mostly a kinder version of the same oppression. The relevant parts of the Bible could fit in a pamphlet. The government adopted it as an official religion, had it not it would have died out in quackville with all the others. But now they had a mandate and military to spread the good word in the known world. The word that was made up by Paul, who witnessed nothing. All hearsay by a wolf in sheeps clothing.
      What happened after Augustine’s decree on the Donatists changed the missionary tactics to sword play, and for 1000 years converted the world by force. It is a historical fact and is not even up for debate among biblical scholars. There was no longer a gene pool capable of free thought. So it is today. There are no secrets for you to find sir. If you take the time to look at this outside the lense of pure faith, it is a ploy to keep people busy debating, dividing, and at odds with a world. The key to understanding the mysteries is unbelief. I would never have guessed that when I was a believer, but the world of perspective opened its doors the day I no longer could excuse it.
      I am not here to wreck anything, but virtually every single catch phrase of Christianity (god is love, merciful, just) every single doctrine, every scripture is at odds with the outcomes of the faith. All of it. I’ll explain that later if your interested in my evidence for that, but there is no reason to believe it is good, other than we’ve been told it is. Nobody could read the Bible with a blank slate and call it good. Sorry. It’s just not.
      There may be some slight pendulum swings in the progression as you suggest, but going back to the source in this game is a futile grasp at a violent and immoral past.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Jim — this TOTALLY sums it up:

        … virtually every single catch phrase of Christianity (god is love, merciful, just) every single doctrine, every scripture is at odds with the outcomes of the faith. All of it.

        And once a person accepts this, they will know a freedom they never had while in the confines of their “faith.”

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Holy cow. I was not expecting all of that at once. There is a lot there. I have been thinking on how to respond to this and almost every way that this can go ends in an pointless argument. And I’m not about that life. So this is what I’m going to say. I get you don’t believe and I respect that. If your not interested in having a conversation about topics, I will respect that and stop talking. Our first conversation was great it made me think about what we where talking about in different ways and I would love to keep that going.
        Thank you for acnolaging that the church is heading back to the original teaching. That was very honest.
        I would be interested in hearing how “scripture is at odds with the outcome of faith”, but only if we can stay on topic. Also some of the things you said about the history of Christianity were very inaccuract. If your interested I can exspound, if not like always its chill.
        Anyway I hope all is well, good luck with the next game!

        Like

        1. Well Dave, it is all connected. I tried to answer each point you made but, like you said, a lot in there—Yours too. Lol. What part of history do you think I got wrong? We can start there if you like. As far as being at odds, you may present a favorite verse or two and I can go from there. But, let’s correct my history if you like, or if you can. Christianity is at odds with its history, teaching, scripture, all of it. It has been pure conjecture for 1600 years plus. Only by calling it good, can anyone be primed to find the good of it. Really.

          Like

          1. Sorry this reply has taken so long. The Hollidays man!

            You made the statement that the reason the the councle of Nicean was called, was because they had forgotten the nature of God. This is misleading and incorrect. Very near the founding of Christianity different groups started spinoffs of christanity. They claimed to be Christians but denying that he was God. The 2 most well-known groups, where “Gnostic Christians” and “Arius Christians”. Both denied the that Jesus is God. Gnosticism was around very early. Most of the aposle johns letters and his gosple, are aimed at fighting agents that teaching. Arius came in around 250 a.d. and he gained a big fallowing. So Constantine who (for whatever reason) didn’t want the confusion, had all the leader sit down and place their official belief in writing. Arius lost his case dramatically. When everyone got together. It was determined that, the teaching which was past down to them, was that jesus is god. So Christians had not forgotten the nature of God. (After all the bible is very blunt about the subject). The only way you can conclude that it doesn’t say this is if you souly focus on a single part, which is what Arias did.
            If you disagree with thi, then we can talk about that. But I have to admit, that I’m curious about why you think, Paul, James, and the gospels teach different things.
            Thanks for the response!

            Like

            1. It’s interesting that you misspell the word following as fallowing, unless it is intensional or the gods trying to tell you something. After a few hundred years of fallowing you have a pope randomly inserting Filioque which caused an even greater divide ( the east/west schism) The nature of God was not agreed upon at all and still isn’t. Not sure how to address this when apparently your learning consists of apologetic writing and you have not made any reasonable conclusions. That is faith in a nutshell. Even the idea you presented is a contradiction. The gnostic and the arius sects, the two main characters didn’t believe jesus was god, your own words. And gnostics believed god is both man and woman. With jesus’ wife the divine companion. Mary M was raised up to be the first and greatest apostle. The truth is philosophy won the day at Nicea, not the truth but the most cleverly worded argument won the day (as always) then with Filioque added at random we have even greater divide than we started. Gnosticism predates Christ and sounds more like Buddhism than Christianity.
              As far as the Pauline gospel which you adhere, and James, I’ll just give you two scriptures
              For by grace he are saved through faith…not of works Ephesians 2:8-9
              —Ye see then how by works a man is justified, and not by faith only James 2:24

              Not really in the mood to list out the entire bible for you (there are websites listing the thousands of contradiction) but through faith alone can you reconcile the absurdity of it all.
              When you find a contradiction, check the premise. One of them is wrong…or both—Ayn Rand
              The nature of the gospel is one of excuses by faith. There is no other way to reconcile the differences. I’ve read as much of the explanations as I can stand. Without the explanations and sugar coating—just believing, there are no reasonable explanations.

              Like

            2. Lol the bad spelling is because I’m dyslexic. Not God, and not intentional.
              Correct me if I’m wrong. I feel like you missed my point. The point i was making, was that Arius and the small group of leaders who agreed with him, was just that. A small renegade groulp. The majority of Christians at that time believe that he was God. This is a historical fact. So the understanding of who god is, was not lost by nicea (That’s my point). In Hebrew one of the words for God is a paradoxical word, its a plural singular. The point of the word, is to show you that you can’t define Gods nature. However you can understand some of it and that underatanding has stayed the same. Just read Christian writtings from matthew, to John, to oragin, to Francis Chan.
              I’m sure u are not interested in going in to a bible study, but you are “proof texting”. if you keep reading ephesians, verse 10 it says that we (christian) where made, to do, good works. This is why I’m talking about the word faith in my blog. James and Paul start making sense together when you have a proper understanding of what they ment, when they said the word Faith.
              I assure you that it is far harder to legitimately prove that the bible contradicts itself, that to legitimately show that it doesn’t.
              I would love to see any damming evendence that you have. And I will be as honest as I can with it. Like always thank for talking.

              Like

  2. “Unless there is a new outside force to influence a reboot” Therein lieth the problem. Christianity didn’t just suddenly appear, that’s the mission statement. The implosion of older forms of worship under the onslaught of Greek philosophy and the crude but effective Roman totalitarian/authoritarian rule bloodily back by its military sandal had all but destroyed belief in the old deities, leaving the field of superstition wide open for that “new” outside influence which quickly used those no longer copyrighted “pagan” beliefs to form its own belief base using the Mosaic Torah as its launching pad. Point? There will always be an idea in the wings to introduce itself as a new interpretation of god, or the gods: man is as much a spiritual creature as it is of mind and body. Nature abhors a vacuum. Those who solidly espouse pure atheism would do well to remember this historically proved fact. I have no doubt that Christianity is fading exactly as this blog post claims but out of the putrefaction something else will spring up to replace it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Well, I can dream can’t I? Many already try to correlate scientific discovery with scripture. Same with Islam. They hairsplit whatever verses they can to show Muhammad had special insight to creation and how the world was made. But, it doesn’t say that at all unless you really want it to. In fact, no supernatural explanation has ever supplanted a natural or scientific one. Ever!

      Liked by 1 person

  3. I don’t see the monotheistic religions just collapsing, though I’m okay with it if I’m wrong. My problem is that too many people in this world support Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (including all their offshoots), and while areas might collapse I don’t see them all collapsing in a short time. That does not mean I do not see a slow collapse, I do, but I think it will take centuries. Just my own personal opinion.

    Like

      1. Before these are completely gone, I think it will be longer. But to be mostly gone, I’d predict about 300-400 years. Canada and the States, 250. Europe (minus France, Spain, and Italy), 200. Australia, maybe 150. No matter what, not in our lifetimes, lol.

        Liked by 1 person

            1. Of course I might, and you are very welcome to surprise me, Nan. Just remember that on average, women live longer than men. I was born in 49.

              Like

          1. I think about dumb things like this all the time. Trumpmandias has already set back some of my earlier predictions by a minimum 150 years. What effect he will have on this set I do not care to think about.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. One thing about change is that it can happen very quickly, even when the situation seems intractable. And the spark that ignites action can be unpredictable. That tendency to decentralize might be as much a strength of the Abrahamic religions as a weakness. Diversity is a strength in an ecosystem. One may fail, but another may take its place. Yet, the overall trend of declining numbers seems clear. This is an aside but I wonder how you define ‘religion’ because I think it is a bit of an elusive target.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I have no issues with personal spirituality and sharing ideas that work. Religion as I think of it are the one size fits all big box churches with the paid preachers. The men of words who love the status and the faux god faith and hell brainwashing of children and the needy. The abrahamics and Hinduism are merely pollution to the minds of men.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Religion is like art: we know it when we see it but actually creating a definition is hard to do. Personally I think religion includes things like certain sports and the idea of capitalism due to their fanatical supporters. To me blind communal support is the key element.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. The true believer. Eric Hoffer researched this phenomenon in the 50s. About 35% need something bigger and outside themselves to hang on to. About 30% just go along with it, and the other 30 are indifferent. What’s the harm in someone else’s belief? It often intrudes in every other persons way of life. Then there are others who make their own way. The skeptic it the person spiritualist. But yes, sports, shopping, politics all can fill that need to alleviate the boredom of this life.

          Liked by 2 people

  5. You make a good point about the power of Religion. Powers require energy to grow; to expand but as they expand, yes, the second law of thermodynamics comes into play. Three major “Powers” have shared Earthian rule, namely Religion, Government and Money – each a “god” in its own right if one considers absolute power a divine prerogative. Each one has had, or now holds, absolute power over the rest of the world, for better or worse. Each has made itself indispensable. Each has been a factor in the development and growth of man’s current civilization. The point here is, it isn’t only Religion that is becoming entropic, but all three ruling forces, or Powers. This spells the end of civilization as we know it and because we have chosen to put our collective and social eggs in one basket, when the bottom falls out the suffering of sentient life on this world will be beyond imaginable.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. We’ve propped up our churches, our money, and our government. Particularly the churches and money. Everyone knows the money system we have is a fraud, and the only thing making it work is we want it to. Religion as well, virtually contradicts objectivity at every turn, yet it holds together out of fear. The partnerships both have with government is the thread wound into a web of total deceit enslaving us to a way of life we think is what we need to survive.

      Liked by 2 people

  6. No matter what happens next, there will be an after, and a dark age, and a new religion. What is worrying, is the form it will take. I’ve often said, I’m privileged to be watching the end times of Christianity, but I just hope Im not around when the new order arrives. It can get messy.

    I just hope someone is taking notes and tucking away the technologies so we don’t have to go back to peat fires and spears…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I know. It doesn’t take much. Look at Iran in 1979. Islam took over and put them back socially to the 14th century. If you are right, everything stored electronically would be gone. Encyclopedia Brittanica and old mechanics manuals would be like gold. Lol Among other things. Literally everything is actually the opposite of what Christianity says, so this paradisiac Millenium ain’t necessarily so if any of it were true. There is no god, but the top tier that would take over are tyrant liars.

      Like

  7. Well since ‘The Bible’ was written by several different authors over thousands of years I would say that Christians have never been able to agree on their God and theology 🙂
    I don’t think religion is going anywhere though, though religions will dilute or evolve. The reason I say that is religion has still persisted around despite massive advances in knowledge and science the last century. By all accounts you think it WOULD die, but it hasn’t. As to why? I have absolutely no clue. I would be interested in hearing what someone who has studied religions has to say about that.
    As a side thought, this information age is both a curse and a blessing. There is more information out there, but also more freedom of speech, which means that people who spout nonsense get heard more often, and also more people will believe them. Think of any conspiracy theory you’ve heard lately as an example.

    Anyways keep up the posts!

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Ah now I have learnt something new. Sorry but I’m failing to see the link there :p
        Are you saying that because people parody religion, others fail to see the parody and thus said religion thrives?

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Ah right, makes sense now 🙂 If many Christians read their Bible more they wouldn’t be Christians anymore haha. I remember during the end of my Christian years having a friend who kept prompting me to read my Bible, so I started with Genesis. Having studied Earth Sciences I was like WTF? Several years later… here I am.

            Liked by 2 people

        1. Also, look how easy it is to dismantle religion bit by bit, but because people have been told it’s true, they believe the supernatural hocus pocus without even investigating it.

          Liked by 3 people

            1. It does take a little courage for people to go against the grain though. Studies show even in a classroom setting, kids won’t raise their hands in opposition to a wrong majority.

              Like

  8. As one old Power becomes effete and withers, a new energetic one rises to replace it. Ergo Argie’s Theorem wrt religions, the proof of which can be observed in the spread of Islam and the withering of Christianity.

    Either way and utterly regardless of morals or decency, Humanity has a desperate need for religion—whatever the ‘flavour du jour’—and will go to any lengths to fill abhorrent vacuums.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. I would sure like to be around when the demise becomes truly evident. Can you just picture the “faithful” floundering in their Jesus soup? Hanging onto every thread of scripture (they believe) validates their “heavenly” goal? And preachers dropping like flies as the collection plate returns empty? Oh yeah! Good times!

    Liked by 4 people

  10. I like that deer. It’s like he’s saying, “Yeah, that Christian chip-monk, get it, “chip-monk” over there is fulla crap. I’m blowin’ this pop stand and goin’ home to avoid hunters who are tryin’ ta kill me.”

    Liked by 4 people

    1. I did get lucky on the timing of that shot. The tom turkeys just showed up for the spring diddle. Hope to get some good pics. They are a little more elusive, but get dumb when nature calls. Like Christians and a Bible study.

      Liked by 3 people

    1. Well according to those 42,000, I have more faith than them. Science makes it 42,001. Here’s to hoping the 1, replaces the rest at a good and generous clip.

      Liked by 2 people

        1. As everyone is unique, that would be a flavorful existence and a wild and interesting break from the big five. I’ll stick with my science gods for now, with an eye on Poe’s Law 😉

          Liked by 3 people

  11. This is an intriguing analogy Jim. You have provided me the label/title of a process, or system, or organism of parts that I’ve always constructed or collected, but could not give it an appropriate or representative name. You Sir have done that for me! Thank you! 🤩

    What is it that I’m talking about you ask? In this life, in this existence on Earth as we’ve learned about it over 120,000 to 160,000 years, we know empirically that ALL THINGS, especially living organisms and systems, are constantly adapting, changing, and evolving. This is glaringly obvious when we look at our world in 1,000 year increments — even objects that appear to our highly narrow short-sighted senses to be permanent — e.g. Mount Everest, the Galapagos Islands, etc. — are in fact moving, changing, and/or dying. Non-stop change! Whether we embrace it or not is ultimately irrelevant.

    What can this be called? The Inverse Square Law and Dissipation of Energy! DAYUM I like that and I have you to thank!!! LOL 😄

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thank you. It is quite fascinating. This is the nutshell version obviously, but the law has stood the test of time, and also has been verified and tested multiple times by others, like Gauss’s Law. These are simply ways of verification, like using multiplication to check your division problem. It’s also very interesting how physics can predict multiple trends in our varieties of life.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Being an Open-system, a FLEXIBLE, MALLEABLE system… science will continue to do the most remarkable measurements, predictions, and definitions of life, of Earth, and of human nature beyond what we could ever imagine. Religion will one day become antiquated and unuseful; it will go extinct. That will be a good thing, a good day! 🤩

        Liked by 2 people

        1. I wish I could share your enthusiasm, but Christianity has shown it has a way of reinventing itself to fit the times. Witness the growth of the prosperity churches. And if fundamentalist Islam expands, we might all be bowing towards Mecca in the future.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Ron, that dystopian outlook is possible as well; won’t really argue that given short-term evidence and data. But should it come down to that condition I will do everything within my power — with collaboration from other open-minded scientific-minded others — to fight and remain alive so that our descendants have the knowledge and the discernment to recognize ignorance, particularly manufactured ignorance and distorted ignorance!

            (with his blue face-paint he raises his sword ala William Wallace) ⚔️

            “They can take our lives, but they will never take our scientific minds and freedom!!!!” 😠

            (bends over and shows him his blinding brainiac buttocks!) 🤩

            Liked by 1 person

            1. “We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields and in the streets. We shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender.”

              Liked by 3 people

            2. I’ll see your willows, aspens, breezes, and shivers and raise you with…

              The dancer slows her frantic pace
              In pain and desperation,
              Her aching limbs and downcast face
              Aglow with perspiration

              Stiff as wire, her lungs on fire,
              With just the briefest pause —
              The flooding through her memory,
              The echoes of old applause.

              She limps across the floor
              And closes her bedroom door…

              The writer stares with glassy eyes —
              Defies the empty page,
              His beard is white, his face is lined
              And streaked with tears of rage.

              Thirty years ago, how the words would flow
              With passion and precision,
              But now his mind is dark and dulled
              By sickness and indecision

              And he stares out the kitchen door
              Where the sun will rise no more…

              Some are born to move the world —
              To live their fantasies
              But most of us just dream about
              The things we’d like to be

              Sadder still to watch it die
              Than never to have known it
              For you — the blind who once could see —
              The bell tolls for thee…

              😎

              Like

            3. Match!! Geddy Lee. But I also have memorized the lady of Shallot. So I up you two Niel Peart drumstick and an Alex Lifeson nude guitar pick

              Liked by 1 person

            4. I wasn’t talking about a guitar in a cave. What’s your favorite device that makes a sound? ;). Lol!

              Like

        2. Oh no! Prof, surely not? If religion goes extinct … who is going to stop the rise of the Savage Brute? Who will stop us killing, maiming, looting raping torturing murdering each other?

          Liked by 1 person

  12. See. That’s the problem when you’re willfully ignorant of the classical philosophical arguments. You end up make vacuously vapid and incoherent claims to to defend your materialist ontology. Why can’t you just accept that life is meaningless without Jesus? Why? Why? WHY???? /sarc

    Liked by 2 people

    1. No /Sarc needed as I am a follower of Poes’s law with everything I read. I know I am ignorant of many things, but applying 200+ year old proven principles I think works here. Mel? Is that you ?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Yeah. I know. It’s a preemptive measure to prevent a certain someone from arguing I’ve admitted to agreeing with their position.

        Liked by 2 people

      1. What course of treatments would you prescribe, Dr. Argus? Surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy or frontal lobotomy?

        Like

        1. There are a couple lines of thought on that. When things start to fall apart, word travels fast and the unraveling can be quite dramatic. Look at your old, extinct favorite company or restaurant. You still have fond memories of it, and can’t believe they went out of business, but they do, even unjustly and new habits take the place of the old.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. “The old order changeth, yielding place to new, And God fulfils himself in many ways,
            Lest one good custom should corrupt the world …”

            I think Tennyson was (a) speaking poetically, and (b) got right.

            And (c) I don’t think he was pushing his God here, he was just using a superb analogy—you’re allowed to do that when you’re clever.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s