The question of religion has been so confused by all parties that it is almost impossible to proceed in any direction. But all in all we have always expressed support here for the secular trend, save only that the term ‘secular’ is itself confused. Protestantism was itself the source of the ‘secular’, even before the rise of modern science. That said, the secondary phases of the Reformation have in many ways left the original versions behind.
The New Age movement has generated a new kind of ‘reformation’ and this has yet to play out. The analysis is always flawed by the confusion over ‘atheism’. And the ‘new atheists’ have made this worse.
We can expect to move beyond Christianity, and Islam, but that doesn’t mean we should all become ‘atheists’. Atheism has turned out to be as incoherent as theism, and a healthy agnosticism is perhaps the basic outcome. But the aggressive ‘religionizing’ of cults like the ‘new atheists’, next to the broader trends of scientism, is generating a new kind of orthodoxy and we have exposed here many times the way Darwinian pseudoscience has been used dishonestly to promote atheism via a fake critique of the design argument using natural selection. It is a warning that the ‘secular’ is being warped by its own ‘world view’ manufacture under the conditions of scientism, reductionism, capitalism, and narrow anti-religion.
The future will move beyond the Axial Age religions, but new formations are already arising, and what is needed is a broad public sphere set of understandings that can help people navigate the shoals of phony secular idiocies, new age exploitations, even granting that Christianity and the soon following Islam are going to get plowed under.
The question of god is insoluble, and a new dogma of atheism isn’t going to resolve that. ‘Atheism’ really means people are rejecting the clearly childish ‘pop theism’ that sprang from Israelite and Persian monotheism. There are indications that there was a deeper version as tokened in the glyph IHVH, and that divinity is an original inspiration had a depth we have lost. It won’t help however to try and repair the hopeless confusion with the same terminology or concepts: that has simply created new layers of confusion. In that sense modern ‘atheism’ is not so much an anti-theology as a means to press the reset button and cleanse the mind of the hopeless muddle of monotheistic concepts, from start to finish, including the terminal degeneration of serious religion in the Christmas rite idiocy that has taken over Christianity.
A good Kantian foundation to the question is the real core of the last phase of the Reformation, with Hegel and Schopenhauer in the wings. The strong turn toward the Feuerbachian moment of early marxism or its period is also classic, but that also somewhat dated now and prefigures the confusion of the new atheists.
The current cultural system has an immense amount of conditioning ideology and this has moved to replace religion, already has in fact. So a secularism that is really capitalist domination in disguise is hardly a good outcome for post-religion.
The whole question is being confused by such as the Dawkins cult which along with the new atheism has brought into existence a new form of stupidity. The real questions of the evolution of religion are apparently beyond the capacity of current science.
Enough for now: the topic is too broad for a short discussion. Many think buddhism will rise to the fore in the wake of monotheism. But already we can see that this religion is also doomed to founder. But it will leave in its wake the issue of consciousness and its complexities, just as monotheism will turn into a new quest to understand values in the realm of fact, an enquiry related to and informed by science, but in a new key. But the effect of science has become almost as confused as that of religion. The entire science realm is confused on the issues of evolution, consciousness and the idea of freedom. A pitiful state of affairs.