Atheists more religiously literate than religious people.

No I wasnl;t saying that you don;t understan religion or I understand religion.. What I am saying is that there is an aura there are spritual things out there that break the barriers of science. O rmaybe they are not in inthe same realm.

Originally posted by American-philosopher
O rmaybe they are not in inthe same realm.

Bingo. Don't cluster the two, otherwise you'll always logically lose (whether or not your opponent can argue their point).

reply to post by American-philosopher


Break the barriers of current science? Yeah probably. However, I don't think that these energies are immeasurable, if they even do exist. I certainly can't believe in these things based off of someone simply telling me that they are real.

Of course. The devoutly religious people tend to believe whatever it is that they were taught as they were growing up. This largely means that they have taken in whatever teachings from pastors, priests, etc, over the years and those people's interpretations of, say the Bible, and taken them as their own truths. The part about this that is insidious is that even when they read the Bible (or whatever sacred text that is relevant to the religious person) they tend to filter it through the interpretations that they were taught rather than any in depth individual insight.

Athiests/Agnostics on the other hand have separated themselves from that bias and are able to read such texts without other people's ideas on them impinging. That and spending more time reading it and picking it apart to be able to dispute the religious in an argument. The problem with them is that they tend to have their own biases based on either the supremacy of science, or simply a materialist point of view that does not recognize the deeper spiritual nature underlying existence (though this is not always the case as athiests/agnostics tend to be a more heterogeneous group than the devoutly religious.)

Each group is convinced of their truth and both groups can be just as fundamentalist about their beliefs. On the whole though, I believe that there are more athiests/agnostics that are open to exploration and differing points of view largely because it is a broader point of view than, for instance saying that Christianity is the only true religion and everything else is wrong.

reply to post by SantaClaus

So, atheists and deeply religious people alike: How educated do you think you are in something you believe in so passionately?

They really had to do a study on this?! I've always assumed it was well known and understood. All you got to do is talk to any religious person on the internet to figure that one out!

Nonetheless, interesting study! S&F

reply to post by sirnex


Well, it takes a study to turn opinion into theory backed by evidence.

It also occurs to me that for many atheists, it takes years of painful deconstruction to come to realize that much of it was a lie. Its like realizing your parents are about to get divorced. You have an idea of this pure, beautiful life together, but really, it was a farce to protect you.

errr. didn't see islam in there.

any reason why?

is this a bash fest coz i love that kinda thangs.

Originally posted by SantaClaus
reply to post by sirnex

 

Well, it takes a study to turn opinion into theory backed by evidence.

It also occurs to me that for many atheists, it takes years of painful deconstruction to come to realize that much of it was a lie. Its like realizing your parents are about to get divorced. You have an idea of this pure, beautiful life together, but really, it was a farce to protect you.

It's wierd for me though, because I was never religious to begin with. I just took an interest in it, specifically the Judaic-Christian mythology. I don't know everything and I certainly can't spout verse after verse, but certain aspects of it's history and how it evolved from Canaanite religion really interested me. Just seems like such a disgrace to call oneself a believer in this crap and not even know where the belief originated from.

Originally posted by fooks
errr. didn't see islam in there.

any reason why?

is this a bash fest coz i love that kinda thangs.

edit on 15-4-2011 by fooks because: (no reason given)

I assumed it was based on statistical necessity. There isn't scientology in there either, because it isn't a high enough of a population to make the statistic relevant. They don't include smaller populations in studies often times because it nullifies the respectability of the study.

I'm not educated on statistics, and I forget the term, so if anyone knowledgeable knows, I'd appreciate it.

reply to post by sirnex


Therein lies the problem. You don't understand because you were inundated with it from birth. If you turned 18, and suddenly someone came to you with evidence that gravity wasn't necessarily a real thing, you'd fight it relentlessly.

If this stuff is presented to you as reality from an early age, you sometimes forget to question it later on.

Originally posted by SantaClaus
reply to post by sirnex

 

Therein lies the problem. You don't understand because you were inundated with it from birth. If you turned 18, and suddenly someone came to you with evidence that gravity wasn't necessarily a real thing, you'd fight it relentlessly.

If this stuff is presented to you as reality from an early age, you sometimes forget to question it later on.

Nah, I'm a pretty open person. I've long been taught that the big bang is how the universe came to be and yet with recent discoveries I've now come to understand that it simply isn't possible. It's just another creation myth in itself. I understand that science and understanding is an ever evolving thing and I'm quiet comfortable with that. After all, that's precisely what science is. Most people tend to forget that and as you said, fight relentlessly to hang onto old scientific beliefs regardless of what new evidence show's us. Then again, others will attempt to utilize and twist scientific discoveries to validate religious, spiritualist or metaphysical beliefs as well.

reply to post by sirnex


That explanation is as perfect as I could possibly imagine it. You done good.

reply to post by SantaClaus


Although I would not say that all atheist are more religiously literate than all religious people,
I am sure there are some. However literacy does not equal spiritual understanding.

Originally posted by SantaClaus
reply to post by American-philosopher

 

Break the barriers of current science? Yeah probably. However, I don't think that these energies are immeasurable, if they even do exist. I certainly can't believe in these things based off of someone simply telling me that they are real.

Someone is not telling you that they are real. Someone is telling you to look outside yourself and look outside off what you think you know.

Originally posted by SorensDespair
Science is not religion, and religion not science, and can't be viewed as such. Religion serves a purpose that science cannot. That being said, I'm an agnostic. Not because I can't pick a side, but because to be truly scientific, one must be. I'm also a religious studies major and find the nature of religion extremely fascinating. I posted this in another thread discussing my respect and admiration for the nature of religion.

I don't doubt that atheists are more religiously literate than most. My professors are some of the most historically, scripturally and philosophically literate people I know when it comes to religion, but many of them have said flat out that they don't believe the hype.

it's about faith, is it not? your teachers have let you down.

no doubt the atheists scored higher for whatever bs troll survey, they are actually keeping score.
ya, coz they dissect everything. no faith needed. very easy and a no brainer for them. spin it!

do i believe them? no i don't. i have faith.

what about islam?

we are talking about religion, right?

what say you about that? lets get literate about that too!

Originally posted by fooks

it's about faith, is it not? your teachers have let you down.

Please explain what you mean. Faith is a crucial point of Christianity, but not all religions.

Ancient Greek religion for example, was a more practical religion that doesn't deal with faith, per-se. It deals with immediate needs and the sacrifice necessary to provide the desired result. If the desired result was not achieved, then the worship was not sufficient, or the gods were in some other way displeased.

Buddhism also doesn't deal with faith, but with the practical understanding of extinguishing suffering through proper thinking. It's not faith based because it does not ask the follower to trust in anything outside of his own experience at any given moment.

I think your teachers might want to expand your lessons past your individual faith based religion.

reply to post by fooks


What about Islam? I'm not sure what it is you're asking, exactly. Are you asking why Muslims seem to be missing from the sample group? Maybe it's because the number of Muslims who took the test didn't provide a statistically relevant number to include in the results.

Are you asking whether the Qu'ran was a focal point of many of the quiz's questions?

Please clarify.
Thanks,

reply to post by SantaClaus
I have always thought this was true. I know many people of different faiths and they were not open to anything but what their church tells them, why is it a sin to think for yourself!

reply to post by SantaClaus


Its funny cause its soo true, christians are really dumb, I used to be one. haha....ouch