'Americans are by all measures a deeply religious people, but they are also deeply ignorant about religion.
Researchers from the independent Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life phoned more than 3,400 Americans and asked them 32 questions about the Bible, Christianity and other world religions, famous religious figures and the constitutional principles governing religion in public life.
On average, people who took the survey answered half the questions incorrectly, and many flubbed even questions about their own faith.
Those who scored the highest were atheists and agnostics, as well as two religious minorities: Jews and Mormons. The results were the same even after the researchers controlled for factors like age and racial differences.
“Even after all these other factors, including education, are taken into account, atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons still outperform all the other religious groups in our survey,” said Greg Smith, a senior researcher at Pew.
That finding might surprise some, but not Dave Silverman, president of American Atheists, an advocacy group for nonbelievers that was founded by Madalyn Murray O’Hair.
“I have heard many times that atheists know more about religion than religious people,” Mr. Silverman said. “Atheism is an effect of that knowledge, not a lack of knowledge. I gave a Bible to my daughter. That’s how you make atheists.”
Among the topics covered in the survey were: Where was Jesus born? What is Ramadan? Whose writings inspired the Protestant Reformation? Which Biblical figure led the exodus from Egypt? What religion is the Dalai Lama? Joseph Smith? Mother Teresa? In most cases, the format was multiple choice.'
12 comments :
Sheesh! This lapsed Catholic would have aced those questions.
Excellent survey. No, I'm not surprised.
I suspect the atheists and agnostics have investigated many religions and after finding none to their liking, became non-believers.
Well, the problem with most atheists is that their worldview leaves them without a valid life philosophy. Because if everyone is dead forever, that kind of takes the fun out of it.
So, if you are like: "I have very bad news. Everyone is going to be dead forever."
then you might theoretically be making sense; However - if you say:
"I have great news. Everyone is going to be dead forever."
then I will spank you for your faulty logic.
"Well, the problem with most atheists is that their worldview leaves them without a valid life philosophy. Because if everyone is dead forever, that kind of takes the fun out of it."
Umm, no. That puts the fun back into life, because this is our only chance and we better damn well make the best of it. ;)
But if everyone is reset back to nothing, then it's a meaningless race to participate in.
Maybe your philosophy makes sense while a person is still alive, but longer term it doesn't make sense.
Think about the people who had a lavish life 3000 years ago. Do we today admire them for their amazing fun, or is the primary impression about them that they are dead.
Just like a person blowing his entire net worth on a diamond watch would be considered irresponsible and short-sighted (albeit fun), that is how talking about a "fun finite life" is also pretty shallow and short sighted.
I mean you have to admit that living forever is better.
Even if you don't understand how it's attainable, you should at least realize it is desirable
Is it attainable by killing Shia? How about Christians?
We are talking about whether it's a better idea to live forever (whether through scientific, or through religious and supernatural means),
or if as Bruno claims it's a funner idea to age for 65 years and then die.
I would argue that the former is the correct answer.
As for the Shia fawktards in Iraq (and god knows where they came from in the first place), they are pigs for putting on a uniform to die for the United States.
Their blood is legal as far as I'm concerned.
Btw - that is another reason in favor of eternal life: to bring back the Iraqi collaborators from the dead, and then destroy them in the Fire.
"I mean you have to admit that living forever is better."
Obviously living forever would be better, but it ain't gonna happen, no matter how many obsessive rituals you perform or how much weird stuff you believe.
Meantime, you are making your life a misery if you believe that you could end up being tortured for ever.
[dolly] We are talking about whether it's a better idea to live forever (whether through scientific, or through religious and supernatural means), or if as Bruno claims it's a funner idea to age for 65 years and then die.
I would argue that the former is the correct answer."
I would agree that living forever is "funner". But I simply don't believe that it can happen. If I did think that 'salvation' could rationally be attained through religion, I would be at your doorstep with the Watchtower right now.
Don, people have to be brought back from the dead, because that is the only way you can have justice. If person X does 1 evil deed, and person Y does 100 evil deeds, if they are both dead (i.e. in an identical state) → that is not justice. You can't dispute this fact
I'm sorry that you don't believe in justice, so you think evildoers can get away with simply dying.
Post a Comment