Does intelligence dictate belief in God?

Originally posted by Conrau K
Atheists do not believe that theists are less intelligent- just fundamentalists and creationists.

There's a difference.

Perhaps this is because creationists refer to Genesis and you do not think that Genesis can correlate with science. There is a problem here, however. The Bible is not book of science, and likewise science does not contemplate religion. Both come at you from two different angles and therefore, it would be easy to assume one or the other must be right and the other wrong. To get a "coming together" of the two I suggest you hear someone who is somewhat of an expert in both the Biblical account of Genesis and of science and not listen to someone who is an expert in only one of the fields. Go to this site

http://www.worshipradio.com/home/ZolaVideo.html

A man by the name of Dr. Gerald Schroeder is both a Physicist and somewhat of a theologin. It is a rare combination and is one worthy of hearing. Just scroll down to the six days of creation and listen to the video. Be warned, however, the video is a little long. After all, there is a lot of material to cover. Tell me what you think.

Originally posted by rwingett
All christians are stupid. Except for the ones who are smart.

😉
KJ
rec'd

Originally posted by aardvarkhome
Some of the world's greatest thinkers have been religious. Others of the world's greatest thinkers have been atheists.

There have been stupid people in both camps.

Then there are the fundies of all persuasions who choose dogma rather than think for thenselves.

Who are in both camps.
KJ

Originally posted by KellyJay
Who are in both camps.
KJ

I think AH means that both camps have contained stupid people, rather than that there have been people simultaneously in both camps. However, if you're looking for a person who simultaneously does and does not believe in god, it's probably best to look among stupid people.

So if it is not intelligence that seperates the theist from the atheist, perhaps it is rationality as has been suggested. Does this mean that all theist are irrational? If any one agrees please clarify. Any other ideas as to what seperates the two camps?

Originally posted by whodey
So if it is not intelligence that seperates the theist from the atheist, perhaps it is rationality as has been suggested. Does this mean that all theist are irrational? If any one agrees please clarify. Any other ideas as to what seperates the two camps?

Theists are all irrational. Belief in the supernatural is irrational. But perfectly intelligent people are capable of many irrational beliefs.

Originally posted by rwingett
Theists are all irrational. Belief in the supernatural is irrational. But perfectly intelligent people are capable of many irrational beliefs.

I took the liberty of looking up the definitions of the words rational and intelligence. The definition of intelligence is the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge and the faculty of thought and reason. The definition of rational is having or exercising the ability to reason or being of sound mind. So on the one hand theists have intelligence and the faculty of thought and reason, and on the on the other hand, are irrational and are not of sound mind and do exercise reason. How can we have reason and be reasonless?

I say that theists can be both intelligent and rational. The difference being that theists look at the same data as atheists do but in a different light. We do not ignore reality, we merely interpret it a little differently. Take for example the material world. The atheist would say that what you see is what you get and use measurements to back up his claim. The theist would also look at the same data but realize that the material world is in a constant state of flux. What you think you see is temperal and actually changing before your eyes. Nothing is precisely as it appears and no measurements are 100% accurate. What then is reality? Reality is actually what goes on behind the scenes that molds and shapes the forever changing material world that we think we percieve. Reality is eternal but the material world that atheists swear by is forever changing and temperal. Who then is the irrational one?

Originally posted by whodey
I say that theists can be both intelligent and rational. The difference being that theists look at the same data as atheists do but in a different light. We do not ignore reality, we merely interpret it a little differently. Take for example the material world. The atheist would say that what you see is what you get and use measurements to back up his cla ...[text shortened]... world that atheists swear by is forever changing and temperal. Who then is the irrational one?

What the hell does this temporal rambling have to do with theism?

Originally posted by whodey
I took the liberty of looking up the definitions of the words rational and intelligence. The definition of intelligence is the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge and the faculty of thought and reason. The definition of rational is having or exercising the ability to reason or being of sound mind. So on the one hand theists have intelligence and the fa ...[text shortened]... rld that we think we percieve. You may call me irrational, but you cannot dispute my reasoning.

Being atheistic does not mean that you necessarily believe in a static world. Most of us who are educated (theist and atheist alike) will agree that the world around us is constantly changing and that we cannot measure things in nature without error.

Their are natural explainations for both of these though. I don't see how either leads some one to belief in a god.

Does there exist something larger and grander beyond the natural? Maybe.

Is everything that exists a contained in the universe? \
Maybe.

Originally posted by telerion
Being atheistic does not mean that you necessarily believe in a static world. Most of us who are educated (theist and atheist alike) will agree that the world around us is constantly changing and that we cannot measure things in nature without error.

Their are natural explainations for both of these though. I don't see how either leads some one to beli ...[text shortened]... nd the natural? Maybe.

Is everything that exists a contained in the universe? \
Maybe.

Do I hear hints of agnostism coming out of you?

Originally posted by whodey
Do I hear hints of agnostism coming out of you?

I've been up front about my position for a long time now. If you want to call that "agnostism," then that's fine with me. I call it atheism (i.e. you are either a theist or you are not. I am not.).

An Agnostic may think the Christian God as improbable as the Olympians; in that case, he is, for practical purposes, at one with the atheists.

Bertrand Russell What is an Agnostic?

Note that I do not use Russell's definition of atheist from that text.

Originally posted by whodey
Nothing is precisely as it appears and no measurements are 100% accurate. What then is reality? Reality is actually what goes on behind the scenes that molds and shapes the forever changing material world that we think we percieve. Reality is eternal but the material world that atheists swear by is forever changing and temperal. Who then is the irrational one?

Actually it is imposible to be a theist and still accept all measurements as being within the margins of error that have been determined (100% accuracy is not necessary).
OK I will allow that a very small minority of athiests believe in a God that does not break the rules of Physiscs but somehow works within the bounds of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle or some other flexible area of physics.

In other words what I am saying is that in order to by a typical theist you must deny some of the observations you make solely on the basis that it conflicts with a faith in something for which there is no evidence. That is irrational.

In your posts you appear to be assuming that people are either always rational or always irrational which you know is not the case. I have never met anyone who is always rational in all things.

Originally posted by whodey
Perhaps this is because creationists refer to Genesis and you do not think that Genesis can correlate with science. There is a problem here, however. The Bible is not book of science, and likewise science does not contemplate religion. Both come at you from two different angles and therefore, it would be easy to assume one or the other must be right and th ...[text shortened]... eo is a little long. After all, there is a lot of material to cover. Tell me what you think.

Most Christians can manipulate the interpretation of the bible. They might say it provides an allegorical truth or a religious truth- not a scienitific truth or historical truth. This is different to fundamentalists who adamantly believe everything in the bible is true in every conceivable way. Often fundamentalism requires doublethink and irrational ideas. It is for this reason they are not intelligent. They are incapable of justifying their beliefs logically and refuse to accept the overwhelming evidence that contradicts them. Fundamentalists are really brainwashed humans incapable of independent thought.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it is imposible to be a theist and still accept all measurements as being within the margins of error that have been determined (100% accuracy is not necessary).
OK I will allow that a very small minority of athiests believe in a God that does not break the rules of Physiscs but somehow works within the bounds of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Pri ...[text shortened]... al which you know is not the case. I have never met anyone who is always rational in all things.

Your definition of atheist is nonstandard. Atheists lack a belief in any god, no matter what limits it has.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Your definition of atheist is nonstandard. Atheists lack a belief in any god, no matter what limits it has.

My mistake I meant theists.