28 Sep 10
1 edit
This just in from LA Times, relative to a study conducted examining the knowledge level of atheists/agnostics on all things involving God.
http://mobile.latimes.com/wap/news/text.jsp?sid=294&nid=23170009&cid=16686&scid=-1&ith=1&title=Nation
EDIT: One small caveat to be considered...
For comparison purposes, the survey also asked some questions about general knowledge, which yielded the scariest finding: 4% of Americans believe that Stephen King, not Herman Melville, wrote "Moby Dick."
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by FreakyKBHBrilliant.
This just in from LA Times, relative to a study conducted examining the knowledge level of atheists/agnostics on all things involving God.
http://mobile.latimes.com/wap/news/text.jsp?sid=294&nid=23170009&cid=16686&scid=-1&ith=1&title=Nation
EDIT: One small caveat to be considered...
For comparison purposes, the survey also asked some questi ...[text shortened]... ng: 4% of Americans believe that Stephen King, not Herman Melville, wrote "Moby Dick."
I like this bit -
American atheists and agnostics tend to be people who grew up in a religious tradition and consciously gave it up, often after a great deal of reflection and study, said Alan Cooperman, associate director for research at the Pew Forum.
followed by this from The Rev. Adam Hamilton, a Methodist minister from Leawood, Kansas -
I think that what happens for many Christians is, they accept their particular faith, they accept it to be true and they stop examining it.
But if people start examining their faith, according to the top quote, the chances are they will end up atheist or agnostic. Let the education begin.
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobI would agree--- to a point. I submit that the level of education is akin to the 'just enough to be dangerous' level, in that many of those dissuaded by their education are held captive by their last conversation on the topic.
Brilliant.
I like this bit -
American atheists and agnostics tend to be people who grew up in a religious tradition and consciously gave it up, often after a great deal of reflection and study, said Alan Cooperman, associate director for research at the Pew Forum.
followed by this from The Rev. Adam Hamilton, a Methodist minister from L ...[text shortened]... to the top quote, the chances are they will end up atheist or agnostic. Let the education begin.
Think of history's brilliant minds which fully accepted the tenets of Christianity and/or religion in general.
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobSo do those who grew up in non-religious homes become theists? Or are there not very many non-religious homes in the US?
I like this bit -
American atheists and agnostics tend to be people who grew up in a religious tradition and consciously gave it up, often after a great deal of reflection and study, said Alan Cooperman, associate director for research at the Pew Forum.
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobI think it is quite interesting to examine your faith - but surely your aim should be to grow in it when it comes to this stage and not let you go against it. In my personal opinion I feel that people become more distant from their faith the more intellectual they get. Not all but most.
Brilliant.
I like this bit -
American atheists and agnostics tend to be people who grew up in a religious tradition and consciously gave it up, often after a great deal of reflection and study, said Alan Cooperman, associate director for research at the Pew Forum.
followed by this from The Rev. Adam Hamilton, a Methodist minister from L ...[text shortened]... to the top quote, the chances are they will end up atheist or agnostic. Let the education begin.
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThink of history's brilliant minds which fully accepted the tenets of Christianity and/or religion in general.
I would agree--- to a point. I submit that the level of education is akin to the 'just enough to be dangerous' level, in that many of those dissuaded by their education are held captive by their last conversation on the topic.
Think of history's brilliant minds which fully accepted the tenets of Christianity and/or religion in general.
I can't disagree with this, but i would bet if these scientists were born today with the information we have now, not many of them would be religious.
28 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobReligion NEEDS religion
[b]Think of history's brilliant minds which fully accepted the tenets of Christianity and/or religion in general.
I can't disagree with this, but i would bet if these scientists were born today with the information we have now, not many of them would be religious.[/b]
29 Sep 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobI agree, I emphasize a bit, though it's due to over a year of such the conditioning to do so to express clearer what I am sharing, as I have many a times had to be defensive to much hurtful outlandish posts of others when I just wish to help them..
What's going on with the excessive capital letters?
I was also removed from chess.com due to 3 extremely rude individuals in a group, huhuh, get this, "Open Discussion" which was obviously NOT the case. lol
It took 3 mnths to return to that site on complete false accusations and vindictive purposes..
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
29 Sep 10
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI am often skeptical of surveys of religious knowledge. Religion doctrines are often terribly complicated and it is often difficult to test whether real knowledge exists. Take for example the Trinity. An atheist may quite accurately reiterate the basic Trinitarian formula 'Three persons and one nature'. He may even be clever and impress his interviewer with his knowledge of metaphysical vocabulary, discussing the difference between the substance and the subsistent person. Yet his objections may betray absolute ignorance of the actual semantic content of these words.
This just in from LA Times, relative to a study conducted examining the knowledge level of atheists/agnostics on all things involving God.
http://mobile.latimes.com/wap/news/text.jsp?sid=294&nid=23170009&cid=16686&scid=-1&ith=1&title=Nation
EDIT: One small caveat to be considered...
For comparison purposes, the survey also asked some questi ...[text shortened]... ng: 4% of Americans believe that Stephen King, not Herman Melville, wrote "Moby Dick."
In contrast, a Trinitarian Christian may completely jumble all the words. Most Trinitarians do in fact profess something sounding very Seballian (each person as a manifestation of the one God.) Yet their religious devotion and feelings about God perhaps more eloquently capture the meaning of the Trinity. The Christian might, for example, thank Jesus for his sacrifice and pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance (clearly showing an understanding of the economic Trinity) but at the same time invoke God in prayer (showing the unity of nature.)
Now the article mentions indirectly the doctrine of transubstantiation. Any inquiry of this is bound to be misleading. The bread and wine do symbolise the body and blood of Jesus. The Catholic Church does not teach that the bread is literally flesh and the wine literally blood -- but that both equally share the real presence of Jesus. A Catholic might not be able to verbally differentiate the symbolic aspects of this ritual from the substantial (or transubstantial.) Their religious behaviour, however, genuflecting and kneeling to the Eucharist, praying before it and so on, does suggest their knowledge of this.
So ultimately all a quiz could do is assess their verbal ability to summarise the doctrines of their church. It does not really assess their actual knowledge.
29 Sep 10
Originally posted by Conrau KTheir religious behaviour, however, genuflecting and kneeling to the Eucharist, praying before it and so on, does suggest their knowledge of this.
I am often skeptical of surveys of religious knowledge. Religion doctrines are often terribly complicated and it is often difficult to test whether real knowledge exists. Take for example the Trinity. An atheist may quite accurately reiterate the basic Trinitarian formula 'Three persons and one nature'. He may even be clever and impress his interviewer with ...[text shortened]... to summarise the doctrines of their church. It does not really assess their actual knowledge.
This doesn't seem right. How does this "suggest knowledge" above mere mimicry?