›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

57% of americans believe in Divine Intervention

CremlianCremlian
edited August 2008 in Flamewars
Divine intervention

Nuff said.... Dealing with tragic situations makes people think there is hope when there is not....
«1

Comments

  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    Divine intervention

    Nuff said.... Dealing with tragic situations makes people think there is hope when there is not....
    Believing in a divine entity because the thought is comforting, and using that comfort to deal with tragedy is one thing.

    However, if people are making decisions as to somebody's medical care because they actually believe that prayer will work, then we've got a problem.
  • jccjcc
    edited August 2008
    I am a bear. Please do not feed me.
    Is that especially higher than the world average?
    Post edited by jcc on
  • ninjarabbininjarabbi
    Believing in a divine entity because the thought is comforting, and using that comfort to deal with tragedy is one thing.

    However, if people are making decisions as to somebody's medical care because theyactually believethat prayer will work, then we've got a problem.
    Agreed. When I was in elementary school I had a friend who was a "Christian Scientist" which basically meant that he didn't take medicine so if he was sick he would just pray to get better. I know hardcore Bible-thumpers who think this shit is crazy.

    P.S. Christian Scientist is an awesome oxymoron.
  • La Petit MortLa Petit Mort
    In the words of John Lennon, "God is a concept by which we can measure our pain."
  • Li_AkahiLi_Akahi
    In the words of John Lennon, "God is a concept by which we can measure our pain."
    To also quote John Lennon, the Beatles are "more popular than Jesus now" and that is the way it should be.
  • Luke BurrageLuke Burrage
    Then Cliff Richard said he was more popular than the Beatles. Therefor Cliff Richard > Jesus.
  • chaosof99chaosof99
    The reason why:
    image
  • fooflyfoofly
    Then Cliff Richard said he was more popular than the Beatles. Therefor Cliff Richard > Jesus.
    Cliff Richard has had a number 1 single in the UK chart at least once a decade since 1950 I believe. Which is more than Jesus did.
  • La Petit MortLa Petit Mort
    Then Cliff Richard said he was more popular than the Beatles. Therefor Cliff Richard > Jesus.
    Cliff Richard has had a number 1 single in the UK chart at least once a decade since 1950 I believe. Which is more than Jesus did.
    Jesus has never won a Grammy. XD
  • WalkerWalker
    Then Cliff Richard said he was more popular than the Beatles. Therefor Cliff Richard > Jesus.
    Cliff Richard has had a number 1 single in the UK chart at least once a decade since 1950 I believe. Which is more than Jesus did.
    Jesus has never won a Grammy. XD
    Hey, man image.

    This thread seems a bit unnecessary. We all know very by now that the USA is a very Christian country, it follows that a large number of Americans would believe in Divine Intervention. I don't think anybody needs CNN to tell them this.
  • rhinocerorhinocero
    Yeah, is this really a surprise? "Majority of people religious, video at 11".
  • TheWhaleSharkTheWhaleShark
    Yeah, is this really a surprise? "Majority of people religious, video at 11".
    It's really not, and that's what depresses me.
  • jccjcc
    edited August 2008
    I am a bear. Please do not feed me.
    A person could always move to one of the Nordic or formerly Communist countries. They seem to have a very high percentage of atheists. One interesting bit is how many atheists seem to live in Israel, assuming the data is reliable.

    *Edit: There's also this chart on percentage of atheists by state, although it comes from a biased source, so it might not be reliable. Original source. Relevant part under "10. State and Faith". Keep in mind that the results have been weighted; further details in the Appendix.
    Post edited by jcc on
  • SchnevetsSchnevets
    Really, I expect that number to be higher. I can think of a lot of people who never go to church, may or may not affiliate themselves as Christians, and yet still believe in a spiritual force which may interfere in situations.
  • ladyobsoleteladyobsolete
    Really, I expect that number to be higher. I can think of a lot of people who never go to church, may or may not affiliate themselves as Christians, and yet still believe in a spiritual force which may interfere in situations.
    Interesting point. I guess I saw the number of believes in divine intervention to be a subset of Christians.

    I am afflicted with this optimistic view of people, which leads me to be continually disappointed by reports of assorted religious convictions.
  • WalkerWalker
    Really, I expect that number to be higher. I can think of a lot of people who never go to church, may or may not affiliate themselves as Christians, and yet still believe in a spiritual force which may interfere in situations.
    Interesting point. I guess I saw the number of believes in divine intervention to be a subset of Christians.

    I am afflicted with this optimistic view of people, which leads me to be continually disappointed by reports of assorted religious convictions.
    Maybe it's a sign that Christians aren't as unintelligent as their beliefs would lead you to think? I've known some wonderfully intelligent, creative, and well read Christians. It's really a matter of social pressures here in the bible belt. Being an Atheist is really hard where I live, so most people don't even approach the idea.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    Yeah, is this really a surprise? "Majority of people religious, video at 11".
    "There needs no ghost, my lord, come from the grave
    To tell us this."
    Hamlet, Act I, Scene IV
  • ladyobsoleteladyobsolete
    edited August 2008
    Maybe it's a sign that Christians aren't as unintelligent as their beliefs would lead you to think? I've known some wonderfully intelligent, creative, and well read Christians. It's really a matter of social pressures here in the bible belt. Being an Atheist isreally hardwhere I live, so most people don't even approach the idea.
    Granted, I also know many highly intelligent Christians none of whom would refrain from taking valuable medications. On the other side, I have also me some short-sighted, bigoted, and simply stupid Christians in the same area. My home town might not be the bible belt but it is heavily populated with born again Christians and I remember the pressure.

    While I don't think that being a Christian means that you are stupid, I do think that being stupid makes you more susceptible to uncritical acceptance of a religion. Thus, if you are stupid, you are less likely to be atheist. In a country dominated by Christianity, that would mean that the majority of stupid people would be Christian since they would have the most exposure to it. It would be these Christians, more than the critical ones, that would easily accept the concept of Divine Intervention.
    Post edited by ladyobsolete on
  • AprecheApreche
    Maybe it's a sign that Christians aren't as unintelligent as their beliefs would lead you to think? I've known some wonderfully intelligent, creative, and well read Christians. It's really a matter of social pressures here in the bible belt. Being an Atheist isreally hardwhere I live, so most people don't even approach the idea.
    If they're so smart, why are they living in the bible belt?
  • JasonJason
    edited August 2008
    I do think that being stupid makes you more susceptible to uncritical acceptance of a religion.
    If you embrace logic, there's no such thing as a critical acceptance of religion. Faith, by definition, is embracing the irrational in order to short-circuit your perception of reality.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • WalkerWalker
    Maybe it's a sign that Christians aren't as unintelligent as their beliefs would lead you to think? I've known some wonderfully intelligent, creative, and well read Christians. It's really a matter of social pressures here in the bible belt. Being an Atheist isreally hardwhere I live, so most people don't even approach the idea.
    If they're so smart, why are they living in the bible belt?
    image
  • ladyobsoleteladyobsolete
    I do think that being stupid makes you more susceptible to uncritical acceptance of a religion.
    If you embrace logic, there's no such thing as a critical acceptance of religion. Faith, by definition, is embracing the irrational in order to short-circuit your perception of reality.
    One can question their faith while still maintaining it.
  • jccjcc
    edited August 2008
    I am a bear. Please do not feed me.
    I do think that being stupid makes you more susceptible to uncritical acceptance of a religion.
    If you embrace logic, there's no such thing as a critical acceptance of religion. Faith, by definition, is embracing the irrational in order to short-circuit your perception of reality.
    At this moment, the question of God/gods/godhood is not one that we have the means to strictly prove or disprove. At this point in time, both atheism and faith are pragmatic assumptions that people take because they feel that holding those respective views increase their quality of life.
    Post edited by jcc on
  • AndrewAndrew
    edited August 2008
    At this point in time, both atheism and faith are pragmatic assumptions that people take because they feel that holding those respective views increase their quality of life.
    I'm sorry, this is bullshit. First of all, I'm starting to think the whole "atheism" term is retarded anyways. I don't go around calling myself an A-astrologer or AYetiologist. When you declare that you believe in bigfoot or UFO's, you pay a price. A small social price in which you loose some sort of respect or dignity in the social world. Hopefully in the future religious people will pay the same price.



    Not believing in religion/belief in god is not something that inherently increases quality of life, it's just living your life in accordance with reality and evidence. Just because believing in an imaginary friend makes you feel better, doesn't mean it's true, right, nor ethical.
    Post edited by Andrew on
  • JasonJason
    edited August 2008
    At this moment, the question of God/gods/godhood is not one that we have the means to strictly prove or disprove.
    There is no evidence for it. Therefore, there's no need to disprove it.
    One can question their faith while still maintaining it.
    If you ask the questions and still have faith, then you are delusional. Faith is believing in something for which there is no evidence. We create this protective little shell around it when it involves god, but let's imagine that I had faith in little green hobgoblins that live under mushroom caps. You would call me crazy. The only difference between little green hobgoblins and god is establishment. The idea of god has been around longer, so it's more widely accepted. And it's taught to impressionable children with no means to filter reality, so they accept it without question.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • jccjcc
    edited August 2008
    I am a bear. Please do not feed me.
    Not believe in religion/belief in god is not something that inherently increases quality of life, it's just living your life in accordance with reality and evidence. Just because believing in an imaginary friend makes you feel better, doesn't mean it's true, right, nor ethical.
    The reality and evidence is that we have no conclusive answer to the question of the existence of God/gods/godhood. As of this moment, the evidence and reality point to holding an agnostic view on the subject. However, this is an incredibly inconvenient view for many people, because it doesn't provide any guidelines for the optimal way of behaving. Certain people are not comfortable with that level of ambiguity in their lives, so they will follow a working assumption which allows them to be happy. For some, that is faith, for others it is atheism.
    Post edited by jcc on
  • One SinOne Sin
    it doesn't provide any guidelines for the optimal way of behaving.
    That's where common sense steps in.
  • JasonJason
    However, this is an incredibly inconvenient view for many people, because it doesn't provide any guidelines for the optimal way of behaving.
    Religion doesn't provide guidelines for optimal ways of behaving either - unless you consider hating people who are different, stoning those whose ideas don't align with yours, blood sacrifices, indoctrination, and endorsement of a system that uses eternal damnation as a cattle prod to be "optimal."
  • AndrewAndrew
    edited August 2008
    As of this moment, the evidence and reality point to holding an agnostic view on the subject.
    Ugh. Sorry, but I really have a pet peeve about someone misusing agnosticism. Agnosticism answer the epistemological question of whether we can or cannot know if god exists, it's NOT a position of belief. Not knowing/caring is just apathy.
    The reality and evidence is that we have no conclusive answer to the question of the existence of God/gods/godhood.
    The conclusive answer is that we have no evidence at all. Are you saying we have no conclusive answer on whether or not fairies exist? Or whether or not there is a giant 300 pound invisible gorilla waiting for you by your car? Claims of existence require evidence that can be independently verified. Just because a lot of people believe one thing does not mean that "the evidence and reality" point to a middle of a ground place where we are not sure. Every single claim made by religions today about scientific matters is complete and utter bullshit. To say that it's up for debate right now is to be willingly ignorant.
    Post edited by Andrew on
  • jccjcc
    edited August 2008
    I am a bear. Please do not feed me.
    However, this is an incredibly inconvenient view for many people, because it doesn't provide any guidelines for the optimal way of behaving.
    Religion doesn't provide guidelines for optimal ways of behaving either - unless you consider hating people who are different, stoning those whose ideas don't align with yours, blood sacrifices, indoctrination, and endorsement of a system that uses eternal damnation as a cattle prod to be "optimal."
    If their God or gods exist as they believe them to, those may in fact be optimal behaviors. Besides, they don't really need to be optimal, the main goal of most such beliefs one way or another is to provide peace of mind to those that hold them. Usually the trouble only comes when two belief sets meet each other that are not able to exist in the presence of opposing belief sets, as with pirates and ninjas, or atheism and faith. :)
    Post edited by jcc on
This discussion has been closed.