A study finds that atheists and agnostics know more about religion than "christians"

[kzzl]

Dude asked, "Are people taking faith on faith?" I'm gonna start using that.

 

[Shawn_Michaels]

People who do not read the scriptures will fall victim to any demonic force.

 

[alissowack]

There is some truth to the matter, however the intentions can be misleading. If agnostics and atheists only intention to studying religion is to defend against them or some power play, then their findings will always be biased. It's not to say that the religious can't be biased as well, but there is this sense that this "studying" is only used to shut a conversation down instead of engaging in conversation.

 

[whar]

It is often through a close examination of religion that leads a person to atheism.

 

[LUClEN]

There is some truth to the matter, however the intentions can be misleading. If agnostics and atheists only intention to studying religion is to defend against them or some power play, then their findings will always be biased. It's not to say that the religious can't be biased as well, but there is this sense that this "studying" is only used to shut a conversation down instead of engaging in conversation.

I agree if you're talking about instances where non believers are reading up on religion with a closed mind and their stance on the issue already decided. However it leaves little room for conversation about religion when the most openly religious in the country are the least knowledgeable. To accept an ideology one is ignorant to is as bad if not worse than knowing about an ideology simply to support your premeditated rejection of it

 

[alissowack]

There is some truth to the matter, however the intentions can be misleading. If agnostics and atheists only intention to studying religion is to defend against them or some power play, then their findings will always be biased. It's not to say that the religious can't be biased as well, but there is this sense that this "studying" is only used to shut a conversation down instead of engaging in conversation.

I agree if you're talking about instances where non believers are reading up on religion with a closed mind and their stance on the issue already decided. However it leaves little room for conversation about religion when the most openly religious in the country are the least knowledgeable. To accept an ideology one is ignorant to is as bad if not worse than knowing about an ideology simply to support your premeditated rejection of it

I agree. I'm in no way letting religion off the hook. I just think both parties should consider their motives. I personally don't think the rise of atheism is due as a pursuit of God's Non-Existence. It has more to do people seeing the religious using their beliefs as a power play for their own selfish endeavors and wanting a way to call them out on it. For the most part...it worked.

 

[Ajackson17]

Atheist are smarter and highly more intelligent then majority of theists.

 

[alissowack]

Atheist are smarter and highly more intelligent then majority of theists.

...then what does that mean for the few Christians that are smarter and highly more intelligent than the atheists? Oh, and I'm sure you meant "than" instead of "then".

 

[LUClEN]

Intelligence can not be measured. All of these studies that found differences in cognitive capacity between believers and nonbelievers rely on IQ tests.

The IQ test is said to be a reliable measure of various kinds of intelligence and its focus on problem solving skills rather than knowledge allegedly makes it less biased. However when one takes an IQ test they can not take the same test as it skews the results. It seems that if this is true then problem solving in itself is based on knowledge (the knowledge of how to solve a problem) and does not eliminate biases as well as it is claimed.