The Nones: Where They Came From, Who They Are, and Where They Are Going

by Ryan P. Burge

In The Where They Came From, Who They Are, and Where They Are Going, Ryan P. Burge details a comprehensive picture of an increasingly significant group--Americans who say they have no religious affiliation. The growth of the nones in American society has been dramatic. In 1972, just 5 percent of Americans claimed "no religion" on the General Social Survey. In 2018, that number rose to 23.7 percent, making the nones as numerous as both evangelical Protestants and Roman Catholics. Every indication is that the nones will be the largest religious group in the United States in the next decade. Burge illustrates his precise but accessible descriptions with charts and graphs drawn from over a dozen carefully curated datasets, some tracking changes in American religion over a long period of time, others large enough to allow a statistical deep dive on subgroups such as atheists and agnostics. Burge also draws on data that tracks how individuals move in and out of religion over time, helping readers understand what type of people become nones and what factors lead an individual to return to religion. The Nones gives readers a nuanced, accurate, and meaningful picture of the growing number of Americans who say they have no religious affiliation. Burge explains how this rise happened, who the nones are, and what they mean for the future of American religion.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, Sociology, Politics, History, Cultural, Christian

160 pages, Paperback

Published March 9, 2021

Reviews

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book was not exactly what I thought it was going to be. I thought I was picking up a popular social science study for a general audience, but this turned out to be aimed at Christian ministers and leaders. Well, it says so on the back cover if you look really hard.

The subject matter is riveting. The data is presented in a clear and logical fashion. The book is a quick read. The book feels a little hastily written and there are some clear errors, eg. Regarding life stages of baby boomers. A couple of sources are heavily utilized and the author didn’t seem to have done any primary interview or survey work.

A primary flaw in the book is that the author presents fact after fact pointing to relentlessly increasing secularization of America, yet draws exactly the opposite conclusion that “we will never see a time where huge majorities of Americans are unchurched.” Really? Never? Just reading the data presented and not having a dog in the fight, the reader is compelled to deduce just the reverse.

The second issue with the book is that it does not really deliver on creating any kind of deeper understanding of who the Nones really are. We learn that atheists are mostly educated, high-earning males who listen to Rush (oops, he left that one out) but that’s kind of it. What kind of outlook on life do atheists and agnostics have? Are they happier or less happy than Christians? How do they socialize? Are their moral codes substantially different from those of, say Hindus or Mormons? All we learn is that you should probably not try to convert an atheist because statistically that’s not going to work out, but the “nothing in particulars” might provide a lucrative “harvest for new religious converts.” Seems a little one-dimensional to characterize a quarter of the US population primarily based on whether they are good conversion material, no?

[Jessaka · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author is a baptist minister who has seen His church drop from 50Members Tio15 or less. I feel that this has sad and him, so he began doing research. After all, he is into saving others. Those who no longer go to church are divided into 3 Categories. Atheist, agnostic, and NONES. I felt that he may be more interested in the NONES, Because he thinks that they can still be saved. The NONES are not affiliated with any religion, and they have left the churches for various reasons.1 thing I do not remember him saying is this. Some of the nuns have gone to Buddhism and Hinduism. In the 90s when I was into Buddhism and then Hinduism They had a lot of members. Then there are those who do not wish to call themselves religious but instead use the term spiritual. They may or may not go to church.

I don't go to any church or any religion. I just don't believe that any of them Have scriptures that were written by GOD. While I realize that there is a GOD, I do not believe in the concept of being saved. And I have learned to dislike the word religion as much as the word spiritual.

When you see how much religion has hurt people in the name of GOD, you began to question. And you question a lot. You may read Books by atheist were you made just examine the bible on your own. And if you were into Hinduism, you may examine their scriptures as well. And then you realize that there really are no answers. And you may be happier, but you may also be disappointed.

[George P. · Rating 5 out of 5]

America’s religious landscape is changing.

The General Social Survey (GSS), sorts Americans into seven religious traditions (RELTRAD): evangelicals, mainline Protestants, Black Protestants, Catholics, Jews, other faith traditions, and nones. Between 1972 and 2018, only two of the RELTRAD categories grew: others, from 3.9% to 6.2%, and nones, from 5.1% to 23.7%. The Cooperative Congressional Election Survey (CCES), which has a larger sample size than GSS, puts the nones’ number higher at 31.3%.

The five other RELTRAD categories declined. In 1972, evangelicals accounted for 17% of the population, rising to 29.9% in 1993, but falling to 21.6% in 2018. Mainline Protestants declined dramatically from 27.9% of the population in 1972 to 9.9% in 2018. Black Protestants and Catholics declined more incrementally, from 9.0% to 6.2% and from 27.3% to 23.2%, respectively. The percentage of Jews also fell, from 3% to 1.7%.

The big picture of America’s changing religious landscape, then, is the rise of religious disaffiliation and the decline of Christian affiliation in the U.S. population.

Ryan P. Burge adds considerable detail to this big picture in his new book, The Nones. He is an assistant professor of political science at Eastern Illinois University and an American Baptist Church pastor.

As a political scientist, he describes how religious affiliation is measured (chapter 1), explains why religious disaffiliation is rising (chapter 2), details the nones’ demographic characteristics (chapter 3), and demonstrates the diversity of beliefs and life experiences among the nones themselves (chapter 4).

As a Baptist minister, Burge concludes his book with two practical suggestions for Christian churches that want to effectively minister to nones (chapter 5).

The first is to listen better. Unfortunately, too many churches put nones in a box, both ideologically and methodologically. The problem with these boxes, Burge writes, is that “to belittle, minimize, or try to explain away the stories of those who walked away or never connected to a church home is to fail to understand that not everyone comes to faith in the same way we did, and people do not stay (or leave, or stay away) for the same reasons we do either.”

For example, churches should not assume that the religiously disaffiliated are hostile to Christian faith. The largest group of nones are not people who claim the labels “atheist” or “agnostic,” but people who say their religious preference is “nothing in particular.” As Burge explains in chapter 4, “The data indicate that one in six of them will move back toward a Christian tradition over a four-year period.”

If you want to evangelize the nones strategically, then, don’t focus your efforts on atheists and agnostics. Instead, focus on the nothings-in-particular because they’re persuadable. You’ll only know that if you listen to them, however.

Burge’s second suggestion is to be less partisan. Religious disaffiliation has many causes, but as Burge demonstrates in chapter 2, the increasingly partisan affiliation of white Protestants offers “the best and clearest explanation for the rapid rate of religious disaffiliation.” To state the matter simplistically, if Christianity is Republican, Democrats will not be Christians. (The same is true in reverse, too, of course.)

Burge does not advise pastors and other church leaders to remain silent on the pressing issues of the day, however. “If pastors don’t give congregations guidance on how to think about politics, then they will get it from somewhere else,” he warns. Instead, he offers this counsel: “speak Truth to them. Preach sound biblical doctrine that cuts across the political spectrum.”

He cites the doctrine of the image of God (imago Dei) as an example of a spectrum-cutting doctrine: “It teaches that neglecting the poor is a violation of imago Dei, and it also teaches us that we should value the lives of the unborn.” The problem with partisan Christianity, it seems, is that it fails to apply gospel values across the entire range of issues American society faces.

Religious disaffiliation shows no signs of stopping, and it is especially prevalent among younger generations. Consequently, I recommend The Nones to pastors and other church leaders who are trying to make sense of America’s increasingly secular character. As Burge puts it, nones are “the largest mission field in the United States today.”

Book Reviewed
Ryan P. Burge, The Nones: Where They Came From, Who They Are, and Where They Are Going (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, Press, 2021).

P.S. If you like my review, please click “Helpful” on my Amazon review page.

P.P.S. I reviewed this book for InfluenceMagazine.com. It appears here by permission.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dr. Ryan P. Burge, a professor of political science and a church pastor, takes a statistical look at Americans who claim no religious affiliation - the so-called "nones." To anyone who has read much about the ongoing collapse of religious superstition in the developed nations, nothing in the book should come as a great surprise. (For example, see Faith No More: Why People Reject Religion (2011). All the trends Burge documents have been visible for some time; we're just watching them expand.) Oddly, Burge seems to greet America's inspiring yet tardy turn toward reason (lagging our similarly prosperous European counterparts by some decades) with dismay rather than the celebration it warrants. But that's in keeping with his rather chimerical epistemology, which vacillates in these pages between hard-headed evidence-based scientific skepticism on the one hand, and evidence-free magical thinking and special pleading on the other. To his credit, Burge is honest about his being of two minds:

At the same time as I learned to be humble about what I don’t know, I also learned to speak confidently in areas to which I have devoted years of study. Charting the course of American religion for the past five decades has been my life’s work up to this point. Still, being a quantitative social scientist as well as a pastor often puts me in an awkward position. Sometimes I am asked to present my work to denominational leaders. Inevitably during the question-and-answer time, someone in the audience will bring up a particularly thorny topic and want me to weigh in on it. I almost always preface my response by asking, “Would you like me to answer that as a pastor or as a quantitative social scientist?”

It's hard to interpret that passage as other than meaning Burge believes in at least two mutually incompatible truths. So much for the Law of noncontradiction from classical logic, I suppose ("contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time"). I regret that Burge neither names nor elaborates on these "thorny topics" - I might have given the book another star for an insider's exposé of the cognitive crises of Christendom. For something more along those lines see Caught in The Pulpit: Leaving Belief Behind, along with Unbelievable.

The latter book makes an interesting contrast to this book. Its author is Rob Hyndman, also like Burge a professor with a strong background in data science, who was deeply involved in the Christadelphian sect before the burden of contradiction between his scientific and magical minds became too heavy to bear. (The psychological name for that feeling is cognitive dissonance, which Burge hints at but does not name.) Fortunately Hyndman came down on the side of science. Perhaps someday Burge will similarly unburden himself. An example of that burden is where Burge describes his early-adult encounter with religious diversity:

One of the most memorable trips of my college experience was a long weekend in Chicago as part of the required curriculum at Greenville College. The goal of the trip was simple: expose college freshmen to a broader range of religious expression than they likely experienced growing up. [...] I still wrestle with some of the things I saw, heard, and felt while on that three-day trip. But one thought that struck me immediately as we drove back home through the cornfields was that religion is so incredibly diverse that I will never truly be able to understand it all.

Here is where metaphysical naturalism makes life so much easier. To the metaphysical naturalist, religious diversity is nothing to "wrestle" with. Rather, it's what one expects for any social construct. Take language for example - the world is full of linguistic diversity. That's because languages are social constructs, and thus they evolve and diversify according to principles that are both natural and discoverable. We should not be surprised every individual speaks a slightly different language than everyone else (called the idiolect), nor should we be surprised that every spoken language continually changes over time, becoming unintelligibly foreign after 50 generations or so. (Just read some old English works, or notice the difficulties between modern American and British English, which have cropped up in just a few generations despite the continuing cultural exchange across the Atlantic ocean. Even Canada, still very much in the Commonwealth, hews closer to American English than to its mother tongue.)

Before linguists figured out linguistic evolution, magical thinkers had to invoke magical explanations (e.g. the Tower of Babel myth). How all the world's peoples could be speaking so many mutually unintelligible languages was a mystery to the ancient Hebrews, but it should be no mystery to moderns. Similarly, the documented history of religious innovation, change, and schism should be no mystery to moderns - unless they "wrestle," as Burge apparently does, to see religion as somehow the product of divine revelation rather than the wholly human invention that it is.

To the metaphysical naturalist, the diversity of religion is no more unexpected than the diversity of languages, art, political systems, music, cooking, and dog breeds. What is surprising is the exception to this diversifying rule: science. You can go anywhere in the world where science is done on a university level and find all the scientists in a given field doing largely the same science. Had Burge's college sent him on a field trip to visit scientists from diverse cultures, that would have been a boring trip. He wouldn't have encountered any science other than what he'd find in his own school's library. That's because even though science is also a social construct, it is highly constrained by evidence and the need to work. There isn't much wiggle room, for example, if you want to build a smartphone that functions. Scientists must learn to put aside their individual and cultural biases and follow the evidence, if they want to get very far.

Indeed, the very existence of science almost certainly rules out a belief Burge holds:

And as a pastor, I never want to discount the work of the Holy Spirit in people’s lives, which can push them in a variety of spiritual directions.

Science is based on the ability of scientists to make controlled observations and to perform controlled experiments. If there is a Holy Spirit meddling in the course of nature, or if believers are able to manipulate God to do their bidding via prayer, then no scientist can control her observations or experiments. As a scientist trained in statistics, Dr. Burge should know how far the vision of statistics can reach. For example, when modern evidence-based medicine began testing drugs and medical treatments for safety and efficacy, scientists quickly discovered the placebo effect. Any competent medical study today must control for placebo with proper experimental design.

In stunning contrast, no medical researcher of whom I'm aware has ever needed to control for the Holy Spirit or prayer. This seems remarkable given the millions of people who have volunteered for medical studies. Many of them were sick and very likely were praying or being prayed for. If the Holy Spirit or prayer had any meaningful effect on the course of disease this would have shown up early, just as the placebo effect did.

Hyndman, in chapter 7 of his book, goes even farther, to show via the Poisson distribution that no supernatural agency can be intervening in tragedies such as road accidents and shark attacks. So while that doesn't rule out the existence of some sort of God, it rules out any sort of God who intervenes in nature, at least whenever pesky scientists are keeping track.

Evidently, as a scientist, Burge never wants to accept a belief without testing it, whereas as a pastor he exempts his magical beliefs from testing. This is the struggle, or dissonance, facing every scientist who clings to religion. As Jerry Coyne explains in his book Faith Versus Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible, religion and science can often coexist, much as marriage can coexist with adultery, but that doesn't make them a comfortable fit.

On a favorable note, I liked Burge's warning about the impending social calamity from automation, not that I'm in favor of the human cost of social upheaval but I laud the facing of facts. Lots more on that is in works such as The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?.

I could go on writing a short book (An Atheist Reponds to The Nones, perhaps), but as this review has already become tl;dr I'll stop here. But there's so much more to get into, such as the science of intelligence, and behavioral genetics, two vast fields impacting on religiosity that Dr. Burge doesn't mention at all.

[Garrett · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a "trained" political scientist (not sure what this means and whether it applies also to me) Burge's stats and methodology are above reproach, and his presentation of the data is very clear, illustrated, and to the point. The book is brief and filled to the brim with charts and graphs that map out the upward trend of people selecting "none" on religion check boxes from 1972 to the present, and what that means in terms of smaller social groups, larger voting blocks, and so on. This is all enlightening and useful.

Burge is also a Southern Baptist Minister, and he tells you that right up front, describing his journey from being churched as a youth to being called to the ministry and so on. This isn't really an issue in his presentation of data until almost 2/3 into the book when the argument about the "nones" begins to be presented as problem to be corrected or converted (if possible - even he renders this as unlikely) and he falls into a trap about atheist stereotypes and agnostic mischaracterizations, pretty much resorting to assumptions based on what bad actors do on message boards and comment fields. Once his bias comes out of the closet, it dominates the final chapters and conclusion of the book, so the law of diminishing returns kicked in for me pretty hard.

So - read it, but be advised.

[Hilaryhelmkamp · Rating 1 out of 5]

I can’t exactly say why I picked up this book, but I’m sorry that I did. Mr. Burge drones on and on with statistical charts about people he labels the “nones” , meanwhile it becomes quickly obvious that he has never had a real conversation with an actual “none”. He follows up with some instructions on how to effectively convert and evangelize a “none”…. Which as I “none” myself I found a bit insulting . Perhaps if he actually took the time to understand the perspective of an agnostic, he would learn that this type of “mission- based”, evangelistic philosophy is exactly why many people leave the church in the first place.

[Michael James · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very little original work here, and comes in woefully short of providing any real understanding of who the Nones are and why they have chosen this path. The fact is, on the first day man created God. Start there. It's about putting our faith in reason and science, in critical thinking and fact based evidence. Enough of wishful thinking and superstition.

[Casey · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was pretty good, although not quite what I was hoping for. An excellent statistical analysis of religious demographics, not much help in figuring out what any of it actually means in any practical sense.

[Kris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Helpful stats on religion in America, including post-COVID data from 2020-2021. Points out some good nuances in the data. He gets a little political and moral at times. But thankfully most of the time he criticizes both sides of the aisle.

[Apollo Anderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

very well researched and written- the changing landscape of American religion is fascinating to me and as one of the 'Nones' discussed in the book, I was impressed with both the data and empathy in his approach.

My biggest takeaways:
1. political polarization and the rise of the internet (two factors that I believe to be heavily correlated) have had a HUGE effect on religious disaffiliation
2. the 'nothing in particular' class of nones are largely agnostic concerning not belief in God, but rather in American institutions; and consist of an increasingly undereducated, low-earning, and socially isolated social class
3. there are good people like Ryan Burge, who are interested in figuring out approaches to solve the problems brought on by this institutional disillusionment and decreased social representation among this group of Americans.

also, I'm a big fan of Ryan's substack: https://www.graphsaboutreligion.com

[Todd Davidson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quick read, excellent data drive analysis of non religious Americans.

• rise of nones has steadily increased since 1993 at least. Multiple causes that Burge discusses. Secularization, technology, evangelical politics, sex abuse scandals, kids getting married and having kids later
• good overview of generation religious attitudes.
• when asked “what’s your religion” the “nothing in particular” answer is about equal in size as evangelicals and Catholics.
• “nothing in particular” are not atheists or even agnostics, though they are often lumped together.
• Burge makes case pastors should plant seeds with the “nothing in particular” crowd as they are open to religious beliefs.

[Rachel Pollock · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am one of the Nones, and I found this book mostly fascinating. The author uses statistical analysis and data visualizations to explain the demographics of the segment of American society that respond "none" to a question about their religion.

It's largely an interesting exploration in to the data of these surveys and how to interpret it. Only at the end of the book does it veer into some creepy language and become clear that the author is writing to a readership of his own congregants and fellow people of faith in mainstream white Protestant religion.

Nonwhite and pro-choice readers will probably feel the most othered by his narrative presumptions.

[Philip · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting, fact based book on important data taken from surveys about religious affiliation. Breaks down the Nones and the three subsections of the None category. Learned a few things and worth the read especially if you know people who aren’t religiously affiliated. It may give you some pointers in how to interact with them.

[Greg Mamula · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most helpful distillation and interpretation of the massive amount of social, religious, and political data I’ve ever read. A very helpful resource.

[Danna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quick read and worth it! I really like the reflection on the end of focusing on the horizontal benefits of church rather than just the vertical. The Gospel is incarnate!!!!!

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A STUDY (WITH RECOMMENDATIONS) ABOUT THE ‘RELIGIOUSLY UNAFFFILIATED’

Author Ryan P. Burge wrote in the Preface to this 2021 book, “I have been pastoring American Baptist churches for the past fifteen years, and I also have a Ph.D. in political science, having published … in peer-reviewed academic journals…. I have constantly straddled the world of faith and academia… I think it makes me an ideal voice to write about one of the most important shifts that has occurred over the last forty years in American religion---the rise of the religiously unaffiliated… In this book, I try to do both… My goal is to take all the education I have had in the social sciences to make the theory comprehensible and the data accessible. So pastors and committed lay leaders, consider this book … a little cheat sheet for your work.”

He adds in the Introduction, “This book is an effort to understand and explain how the number of religiously unaffiliated went from no more than a rounding error to nearly a quarter of the US population… I will use both the theory and methodological tools put forth by social science to explore what demographic, religious, and political factors have and are giving rise to the nones.” (Pg. 4)

He clarifies, “there are two traditions that have had a great deal of volatility over the past four and a half decades: mainline Protestants and those without a religious affiliation---the ‘nones,’ as I call them. While this book is focused on those who claim to have no connection to a faith tradition, it’s important to understand what options are available to people who desire to join a religious community---before they check the ‘none of the above’ box. Some may be selecting the ‘no religion’ box because they feel as if they have no better options on the survey.” (Pg. 14)

He explains, “I will … be using the classification scheme put forth by Pew to describe the religiously unaffiliated as three distinct groups---atheists, agnostics, and those who believe in nothing in particular… it’s [therefore] impossible to make distinctions among the various types of ‘nones.’ One of the primary goals of this work is to illustrate … that nones are not created equal. Lumping atheists … with those who say that they are ‘nothing in particular’ is… inappropriate, as the two groups think, act, and vote in completely different ways.” (Pg. 31-32)

He suggests, “Another way to think about the issue is that the United States is experiencing secularization but that it is several decades delayed in comparison to countries in Europe… the astronomical rise in the religiously unaffiliated does provide tacit evidence that the United State is seeing a wave of delayed secularization and that the United States will likely look more and more like Europe as time passes.” (Pg. 41-42)

He notes, “How should pastors feel about the fact that nearly a quarter of Americans are unaffiliated and an increasing number of Catholics and Protestants say they never attend services?... it’s possible, and probably even likely, that many millions of people were just not being honest with the survey administrators decades ago. Now we are seeing an accurate picture of American religion… Maybe an individual who is willing to be honest about where they stand in matters of spirituality is more open to reconsidering their future than someone who is not being honest with themselves.” (Pg. 46)

He observes, “It is likely that many millions of Americans now declare they are religiously unaffiliated because of things they have seen or read on the Internet… the internet has likely also had a polarizing impact on other parts of American life as well, especially politics. It’s possible that this polarization has galvanized Americans, so many people feel that they have to pick sides---Republicans versus Democrats, believing in something versus having no religious affiliation.” (Pg. 49)

He states, “disaffiliation is directly related to political ideology… A liberal it twice as likely as a moderate and four times more likely than a political conservative to be unaffiliated… [But] Do our politics impact our religious affiliation, or does our religiosity have an impact on what political party we identify with?... Instead of deciding who they will cast a ballot for based on their religious tradition, most Americans pick a church that lines up with their view of the political world.” (Pg. 52-54)

He proposes, “It seems plausible that many people have walked away from a religious affiliation since 2000 for a variety of … reasons that they may not want … to describe… Mentioning the Catholic Church scandal may have become an easy way to shut down discussion regarding reasons for leaving religion. I don’t want to minimize those who have been affected by sexual abuse in the … churches… But it seems quite a statistical stretch to say that tens of millions of Americans were so affected by the scandal that they left not just the Catholic church but other faith groups as well.” (Pg. 61)

He asserts, “I don’t think any amount of rhetoric from social scientists or theologians will convince tens of millions of evangelicals to veer back to the theological and political center in the coming decades. Websites… focus on making the other side of the religious or political debate look silly. Human beings want to have their beliefs about the world confirmed. In many ways, the damage has already been done---the wave of the nones will continue to grow in size.” (Pg. 67)

He suggests, “In short, the nones look like the United States because they make up such a large part of this country… that also means that any strategy of evangelizing the religiously unaffiliated cannot be one-size-fits-all… my hope is that … pastors and denominational leaders will come away with … the realization that they had no idea what the nones really look like… they come from all walks of life and represent what could accurately be described as the largest mission field in the United States today.” (Pg. 70)

He says, “It’s clear that every successive generation starts out less religious than the one prior… As these young people become more outspoken about their move away from religious affiliation, that gave permission to older people who had been sliding toward disaffiliation to finally declare their true religious attachments. If this is truly the case, then many more nominal Christians are going to check the ‘no religion’ box going forward, and that’s not necessarily true just among the youngest Americans.” (Pg. 81)

He notes, “These results provide only very minimal support for the idea that education and religious affiliation are negatively related… the mass disaffiliation that appears in the data for those with college degrees largely abated in the last few decades. Let me offer a possible explanation for the shift… the type of people who went to college fifty years ago are likely much different from those who are attending classes today… people from all walks of life are earning bachelor’s degrees. So while it may be true that some people are lured away from religion after taking a few college philosophy courses, that’s the exception, not the rule.” (Pg.85)

He concludes, “I hope this … serves as a word of caution to anyone who tries to paint this group with a broad brush. Atheists are some of the most educated individuals in the United States… They are incredibly politically active… They are also … incredibly unlikely to become Christians… agnostics … too have nigh levels of education… They are slightly less liberal than their atheist counterparts… very few of them are open to a Christian message. Nothing in particulars are the largest group... they have incredibly low levels of educational attainment… Socially and politically, they are isolated… they don’t go to political meetings… just four in ten say that religion is ‘not at all important’ to them. About one in six beomes affiliated with a Christian tradition over a four-year period. However, nothing in particulars represent the fastest-growing religious group in the United States today…. The group also seems… to be struggling in American society… They seem isolated as well. These are the people who may be the most receptive to faith and the most likely to gain real social and economic benefits from being part of a religious community. If religious groups want to reverse the growth of the nones, they should look no further than the nothing in particulars in their midst.” (Pg. 121-122)

This book will be of great interest to those interested in the future of the Christian church in America.

[Kjelse Rittmeyer · Rating 3 out of 5]

First book of 2023 read: The Nones by Ryan Burge. It is written by a Christian pastor and political scientist. I read it in two hours because it was assigned to my coworkers and I to read over Christmas break and I just realized we may be talking about it at our meeting tonight 😂 I definitely skimmed over parts but got the main points and dove more carefully in some parts.

It is a great book on the data surrounding the rise of “Nones,” or those without religious affiliation, in America. Analysis of data comprised most of the book. What was most fascinating was the differences within the group of Nones, from atheist to agnostic to “nothing in particular,” and how the “nothing in particular” group is rising sharply but is very different demographically from atheists and agnostics (for example, they are far more disengaged from politics and society than atheists/agnostics, yet will attend religious services more often. They are much poorer and way less educated than atheists/agnostics, as well).

It was a very bad book on how to reach out to them, and I was glad the author only devoted a couple pages to that section because I definitely disagreed with him. The author exposed his liberal leanings when he mentions that evangelicals, as opposed to mainline Protestants, hold that women are not equal to men as “complementarians,” as well as other subtle digs toward conservative Christians. He essentially says that what the Nones need are to be listened to. Then he says that to stop the rise of people leaving Christianity we just need to start caring for their social and physical needs, that it’s essentially better to give out lunches without the Gospel and that maybe one day they’ll look back and have warm fuzzies about the church.

If you’re interested in the actual data and facts surrounding religion in the United States over the last 50 or so years, I recommend this. If you want practical advice on evangelism and how to stop the religious decline, you’re better off finding another author and book.

[Johnathan Nazarian · Rating 4 out of 5]

The "nones" (those who mark none on religious classification surveys) are more complex and less monolithic than many assume, primarily consisting of athiest, agnostics, and "nothing in particular." This book explores the statistics and makes sense of the hodgepodge of easily available but hardly accessible statistics. Burge does a fantastic job of explaining these statistics in an understandable way, breaking them down by what they mean, what they don't mean, and what they could mean. If you are looking for an action plan ,steps to take, or ideas on how to make a difference, or even blind optimism - you will find this lacking. And, yes, the gist of the book could be summarized in a short blog post. Nevertheless, for a truly comprehensive understanding of the religious landscape of America, this book hits the nail on the head. For the most part, Burge does not make assumptions or assertions. In the rare instance he does, he is clear that it is his observation or hypothesis that cannot be necessarily supported as factual. This honesty is refreshing. The primary take away for me: nones (specifically "nothing in particular's") are numerically increasing rapidly, will continue to do so, but most of them are receptive to evangelization. Worth reading and much easier to read than one would think, given the heavy statistical analysis.

[Gregory Glover · Rating 4 out of 5]

The second edition updates the data on NONES following COVID and suggests some tentative conclusions about the effect of the pandemic on religion, especially church attendance. Major takeaways are (still) that the percentage of those who are atheist, agnostic, and nothing in particular keeps growing--and the number of mainline church attendees keeps falling. Perhaps the most insightful section is the one on who moves (and to which groups and why) over time. This was followed closely for me by the demographic description of the NONES--they are hurting economically and socially. There's a lot here for pastors in particular, and mainline pastors especially, to consider as they try to navigate these waters. The graphic with the greatest impact for me comes on p. 83 in my edition and the quote that says nearly half of Gen Z are NONES, nearly double the number who identify as Christian. That's our future.

[David Blankenship · Rating 4 out of 5]

I listened to this as an audio book on a road trip, about 4 hours. Thus I did not see the many graphs other reviewers talk about.

This is a well-sourced statistical look into the changing American Christian landscape over the past half-century. Is the United States becoming less Christian? Generation by generation it appears to be so. But the question of what 'nones' are is up for debate. Not simply atheist or agnostic, most see themselves as 'nothing in particular', which is not so much a statement about their feelings of God as much as it as a social identifier of those who no longer feel attached to organized religion. The author sees this as an opportunity to bring people to faith, in that people are finally being honest in identifying their discontent with old patterns of Christian ecclesiology.

There is some good information here, but few examples of what this data looks like in one's personal life.

[Hannah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ryan Burge explains who the religious nones are (he breaks the group down into atheists, agnostics, and nothing-in-particulars) and why they are growing in the USA. This book is full of graphs and data from the GSS and CCES surveys. Despite the emphasis on numbers, this book is readable. Ryan explains the data thoroughly and clearly.

He wrote the book primarily for American Christians who want to understand the decline of the religiously affiliated in the country, and Ryan occasionally shares his experiences as both a political scientist and a mainline pastor. However, due to its emphasis on social science research rather than on religious anecdotes, anybody who is interested in understanding changes in religion would appreciate this book.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

The "Nones" refers to the growing number of Americans who since the 1990s have walked away from religion in America. The author is uniquely qualified to examine the data as he's not only a PhD in political science but also a Baptist pastor. The book wasn't on my radar, but the author was interviewed recently on the PBS News Hour so picked up a copy.

Book's fairly short and data driven, but it's a fascinating look at the Nones who are hardly your stereotypical monolith of Americans (in fact some subgroups, like religious subgroups, couldn't be more different). Book looks at things that have driven people from the church as well as means of churches perhaps winning some of them back. Learned a lot!

[Leif Paulson · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read the updated version of this book.

The author performed an extensive analysis of various surveys on church attendance and belief among a variety of demographic groups. He made compelling arguments for the church to offer more informal conversation events (please stop with endless LOUD MUSIC) and to get out of comfort zones to reach individuals. I was a bit surprised that COVID wasn’t a main reason of declining attendance as many churches tried to wish it away or deny it.

I do think more analysis was necessary for single vs married. As a single person, it can be tough to be in an environment where the family is primary and where there can be invisible barriers affecting single people. Still, a worthwhile look.

[Julie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting data. The author flags one aspect in particular, about people's willingness to lie on surveys because of a bias toward religion, as incredibly important, and I think he actually understates the effects, given the studies.

The various theories for why the "nones" are rising are all plausible and intriguing. I assume that it's a combination of all of the factors, but I was interested in the author pointing out politics as one strong lever, and one place religious folks can choose to redirect and recenter their outreach and ministry.

[conor · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a remarkably helpful, brief guide to 'the nones', particularly for folks within religious traditions that want to reach out to them. I learned quite a bit and will be thinking about some of the implications of what Burge lays out here for some time (particularly the divisions he digs into among the nones--education and income of 'nothing particular' compared to 'atheists' and 'agnostics', etc.). A quick read that acts as a primer/teaser of sorts and left me wanting more, but that was quite illuminating.

[David Mccracken · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting data on religion (and lack of religion) in the US. The target audience is pastors looking to convert folks to (or back to) religion, which gives a certain spin to the narrative. It is sort of fun, though, to see oneself, as a "None", analyzed and dissected. To its credit, this is ultimately a data book. There aren't stories about conversions or failures to convert. This is about what people say on surveys and what they have said on surveys in the past and how that maps to a changing world.

[Beran Fisher · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a decent statistical analysis of religious demographics in the United States. The numbers are solid and works to paint a picture of exactly where the “religious nones” demographic came from.

My only gripe with it is how Burge shamelessly uses the numbers to show Christian readers how they can lead the religiously unaffiliated into Christianity in the last couple of chapters (“avoid atheists,” he says). Honestly I wouldn’t have even had a problem with that if the book description had been forthright that this was the book’s purpose.

Good information overall though.

[Dave Milbrandt · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an excellent volume because the author views the question through a social science lens not through his pastor lens. As I also have degrees in politics and religion, I would have been fine if this was an academic volume like I had read in grad school. Thankfully for everyone else (and for me, to be honest), he explains things in an easy-to-understand fashion. He looks at the data and lets the numbers tell the story, with some reasonable interpretation when it is warranted. He enlightened me on this subject in a way I much appreciated.

[Michael Samerdyke · Rating 4 out of 5]

It reads very quickly and presents a common-sense approach to an important development in American life.

As I understand the book, the "nones" are a diverse group, some of whom are hardline atheists, but some of whom are people who are unplugged from most institutions in American society. What we are seeing is the "atomization" of postwar American society.

A good book to get discussions started.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

The social research reported on in this brief book is enormously important and is intelligently conceived. The book is extremely well written and is accessible to any layperson who is interested in the secularization of our society. One could wish for the closing pages, where Burge considers strategy implications for the church, to be significantly expanded. Yet, one book and one thinker cannot do everything. I highly recommend this book.