http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/odd/8032970/atheists-jews-top-religious-knowledge-survey/

They may not believe in God or gods but they know a thing or two about them.

Atheists and agnostics topped a survey of religious knowledge among Americans released on Tuesday by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

"On average, Americans correctly answer 16 of the 32 religious knowledge questions on the survey. Atheists and agnostics average 20.9 ... Jews and Mormons do about as well, averaging 20.5 and 20.3 correct answers," Pew said.

It found Protestants answered 16 correctly and Catholics on average 14.7.

On questions about the Bible and Christianity, Mormons and white evangelical Protestants scored the highest, while Jews, atheists and agnostics trumped the other faiths on their knowledge of Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism.

"While previous surveys by the Pew Research Center have shown that America is among the most religious of the world's developed nations, this survey shows that large numbers of Americans are not well informed about the tenets, practices, history and leading figures of major faith traditions -- including their own," said Pew, which is based in Washington.

To see the "U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey" go to: http://pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-and-Practices/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey.aspx

Highlights of the survey include:

_ More than four-in-10 Catholics do not know that their church teaches that the bread and wine used in Communion actually become the body and blood of Christ.

- About half of Protestants cannot correctly identify Martin Luther as the person who sparked the Protestant Reformation.

- Less than half identified Buddhism as the Dalai Lama's religion, 51 percent knew that Joseph Smith was Mormon and 54 percent correctly said the Koran is the Islamic holy book. More than 80 percent knew that Mother Teresa was Catholic.

- Nine-in-10 Americans know U.S. Supreme Court rulings do not allow teachers to lead public school classes in prayer. But two-thirds incorrectly said Supreme Court rulings prevent them from using the Bible as an example of literature.

Hands up if you're surprised.

Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality.

Good general knowledge about the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran or the Vedda just means that the person is well read. It certainly doesn't mean that they will be more compassionate towards others.

The question remains - Can an atheist really understand religion without understanding gods?

When it comes down to the nitty gritty, most people in religious circles will agree that theologists understand religions best. However, the paradox remains that a fair proportion of theologists (even Christian theologists) are actually atheists.

Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality.

- Muso

Yeah .. that's so true!

Some of my best friends are Agnostics or Atheists .. interestingly enough .. they possess a good religious knowledge base .. but that's about it.

Oh and none of them have bothered to read the Holy Bible itself for some reason .. but they've read millions of articles by others ON the Holy Bible and its teachings .. another recurring observation I've discerned.

muso wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 11:01am:

Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality. Good general knowledge about the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran or the Vedda just means that the person is well read. It certainly doesn't mean that they will be more compassionate towards others. The question remains - Can an atheist really understand religion without understanding gods? When it comes down to the nitty gritty, most people in religious circles will agree that theologists understand religions best. However, the paradox remains that a fair proportion of theologists (even Christian theologists) are actually atheists.

Of course you can muso.....
Religion is just a set of rules and ideas built by humans to explain the unexplainable....
You can understand the structure and the belief system, without accepting the existence of the deity it's built around....

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 1:13pm:

Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality. - Muso Yeah .. that's so true! Some of my best friends are Agnostics or Atheists .. interestingly enough .. they possess a good religious knowledge base .. but that's about it.

What does that mean? Are you saying that they dont have moral or ethical principles?



Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 1:13pm:

Oh and none of them have bothered to read the Holy Bible itself for some reason .. but they've read millions of articles by others ON the Holy Bible and its teachings .. another recurring observation I've discerned.

That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers".

If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point.i

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 1:27pm:

Of course you can muso..... Religion is just a set of rules and ideas built by humans to explain the unexplainable.... You can understand the structure and the belief system, without accepting the existence of the deity it's built around....

Your definition of religion says to me that you don't get it.

As an Ignostic, I sit on the fence, but I see both sides of the argument.

A Theist says - There is a God.
An Atheist says - There is no God.
An Ignostic says - Tell me what a God is in a way I can understand and we'll talk.



Quote:

What does that mean? Are you saying that they dont have moral or ethical principles?

It means that they haven't experienced God.

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 1:13pm:

Oh and none of them have bothered to read the Holy Bible itself for some reason .. but they've read millions of articles by others ON the Holy Bible and its teachings .. another recurring observation I've discerned.

I know what you mean. It's like reading a harsh critique of a show in the newspaper, and then saying "Now I've read the critique, I know everything about the show, so I don't need to go"

Quote:

Your definition of religion says to me that you don't get it.

Do you always act so condescending whenever you're talking about something that people are sensitive about?

muso wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 2:08pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 29th, 2010 at 1:27pm: Of course you can muso..... Religion is just a set of rules and ideas built by humans to explain the unexplainable.... You can understand the structure and the belief system, without accepting the existence of the deity it's built around.... Your definition of religion says to me that you don't get it. As an Ignostic, I sit on the fence, but I see both sides of the argument. A Theist says - There is a God. An Atheist says - There is no God. An Ignostic says - Tell me what a God is in a way I can understand and we'll talk. Quote: What does that mean? Are you saying that they dont have moral or ethical principles? It means that they haven't experienced God.

You don't need to experience 'God' to understand a religion....

Gods are (apparently) eternal supreme beings etc etc..
Religion, on the other hand, is a HUMAN attempt to explain or understand gods....

The rules, commandments, doctrines etc are human constructs....and as such are quite easy to understand.....

aikmann4 wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 2:25pm:

Quote: Your definition of religion says to me that you don't get it. Do you always act so condescending whenever you're talking about something that people are sensitive about?

People are sensitive about their atheism?  :o I must apologise.

Miscomprehension.

What does that mean? Are you saying that they dont have moral or ethical principles?

- Darkhall67

What does it mean??? It means you ought to read my responses a tad more carefully.

Oh and another thing  ...  there are no hidden messages in my replies to other posters.

That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers".

If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point.

- Darkhall67

Perhaps you ought to take another look at the survey in your OP. It doesn't support what you've just stated.

I know what you mean. It's like reading a harsh critique of a show in the newspaper, and then saying "Now I've read the critique, I know everything about the show, so I don't need to go"

- Muso

Precisely!!!

Thank you .. and well put :)

As an Ignostic, I sit on the fence, but I see both sides of the argument.

A Theist says - There is a God.
An Atheist says - There is no God.
An Ignostic says - Tell me what a God is in a way I can understand and we'll talk.

- Muso

Ahh ... thought you may have been an Agnostic Muso!

I have the most awesome chats with your species!

Good to see you guys around in Spirituality lol :)

muso wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 11:01am:

Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality.

Having been raised in a religious family, I disagree. The knowledge and soul feed the belief.


Quote:

Good general knowledge about the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran or the Vedda just means that the person is well read. It certainly doesn't mean that they will be more compassionate towards others.

On what do you base this? Good knowledge found in the religious texts not only show people how to behave morally, but also in the face of adversity. It allows the religious to identify with those who came before them and use that knowledge to act. It also allows them to reflect in meditation on what it means to be religious. The list goes on... but really, a person that is engaged in bible study on a regular basis, is nearer to god and his design for humanity.

Compassion for those outside of the religion is not necessarily a religious concept. Compassion for those within the religion is not always required of the faith base. In essence: Faith does not equal compassion. Why you think it does is beyond me.


Quote:

The question remains - Can an atheist really understand religion without understanding gods?

Can an atheist or agnostic have an understanding of gods without believing in gods? Yes... but you must be studied in that which you seek.


Quote:

When it comes down to the nitty gritty, most people in religious circles will agree that theologists understand religions best. However, the paradox remains that a fair proportion of theologists (even Christian theologists) are actually atheists.

If the religious were bothered with their faith, then they too would have a deeper understanding of what that faith means for them and their kind. That they do not bother themselves with their religious text, but rather move with the humanist and political flow of things is a sad indictment upon them. Quite frankly, a religious view can in many instances be preferable to the humanist view. For one thing, it clearly defines persons' responsibilities to the 'other', which humanism nor politics does not.

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 3:14pm:

What does that mean? Are you saying that they dont have moral or ethical principles? - Darkhall67 What does it mean??? It means you ought to read my responses a tad more carefully.

Or perhaps you could explain it more carefully.


"Lisa wrote on Today at 1:13pm:
Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality.

- Muso

Yeah .. that's so true!

Some of my best friends are Agnostics or Atheists .. interestingly enough .. they possess a good religious knowledge base .. but that's about it.  "


"That's about it"?   So are you saying that their knowledge of religion and religious issues is good but they dont possess much knowledge in other subjects?

Or that they have a good knowledge of religious issues but dont possess much spirituality?

Or that they possess a good knowledge of religious issues but dont possess the ethical and moral values that religious belief supposedly imbues?


Clarity would be appreciated.




Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 3:14pm:

Oh and another thing  ...  there are no hidden messages in my replies to other posters.

And what does that mean?

Clarity would be appreciated.

- darkhall67

Clarity exists within context. Have another go!

Sappho wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 3:46pm:

muso wrote on Sep 29th, 2010 at 11:01am: Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality. Having been raised in a religious family, I disagree. The knowledge and soul feed the belief. Quote: Good general knowledge about the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran or the Vedda just means that the person is well read. It certainly doesn't mean that they will be more compassionate towards others. On what do you base this? Good knowledge found in the religious texts not only show people how to behave morally, but also in the face of adversity. It allows the religious to identify with those who came before them and use that knowledge to act. It also allows them to reflect in meditation on what it means to be religious. The list goes on... but really, a person that is engaged in bible study on a regular basis, is nearer to god and his design for humanity. Compassion for those outside of the religion is not necessarily a religious concept. Compassion for those within the religion is not always required of the faith base. In essence: Faith does not equal compassion. Why you think it does is beyond me. [quote]The question remains - Can an atheist really understand religion without understanding gods?

Can an atheist or agnostic have an understanding of gods without believing in gods? Yes... but you must be studied in that which you seek.


Quote:

When it comes down to the nitty gritty, most people in religious circles will agree that theologists understand religions best. However, the paradox remains that a fair proportion of theologists (even Christian theologists) are actually atheists.

If the religious were bothered with their faith, then they too would have a deeper understanding of what that faith means for them and their kind. That they do not bother themselves with their religious text, but rather move with the humanist and political flow of things is a sad indictment upon them. Quite frankly, a religious view can in many instances be preferable to the humanist view. For one thing, it clearly defines persons' responsibilities to the 'other', which humanism nor politics does not. [/quote]

And what does that mean?

- Darkhall67

It means exactly what it says it means. Ok?

Sappho wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 3:46pm:

muso wrote on Sep 29th, 2010 at 11:01am: Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality. Having been raised in a religious family, I disagree. The knowledge and soul feed the belief. Quote: Good general knowledge about the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran or the Vedda just means that the person is well read. It certainly doesn't mean that they will be more compassionate towards others. On what do you base this? Good knowledge found in the religious texts not only show people how to behave morally, but also in the face of adversity. It allows the religious to identify with those who came before them and use that knowledge to act. It also allows them to reflect in meditation on what it means to be religious. The list goes on... but really, a person that is engaged in bible study on a regular basis, is nearer to god and his design for humanity. Compassion for those outside of the religion is not necessarily a religious concept. Compassion for those within the religion is not always required of the faith base. In essence: Faith does not equal compassion. Why you think it does is beyond me. [quote]The question remains - Can an atheist really understand religion without understanding gods?

Can an atheist or agnostic have an understanding of gods without believing in gods? Yes... but you must be studied in that which you seek.


Quote:

When it comes down to the nitty gritty, most people in religious circles will agree that theologists understand religions best. However, the paradox remains that a fair proportion of theologists (even Christian theologists) are actually atheists.

If the religious were bothered with their faith, then they too would have a deeper understanding of what that faith means for them and their kind. That they do not bother themselves with their religious text, but rather move with the humanist and political flow of things is a sad indictment upon them. Quite frankly, a religious view can in many instances be preferable to the humanist view. For one thing, it clearly defines persons' responsibilities to the 'other', which humanism nor politics does not. [/quote]


General knowledge of the Bible, Torah, Qu'ran or the Vedda simply means that atheists or agnostics take the time to study and understand religions other than the ones they were raised in....


And of course an atheist or agnostic can understand 'religion'.....religion has nothing to do with 'god'...

Do we need to understand electronics in order to use a computer or a television???

Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality.

- Muso

Having been raised in a religious family, I disagree. The knowledge and soul feed the belief.

- Sapho

Well this discussion is now getting interesting.

I too have been raised within a religious family/extended family environment .. and I've seen how religious knowledge can be helpful in some instances .. but not in all.

Quote:
What does that mean? Are you saying that they dont have moral or ethical principles?

- Darkhall

It means that they haven't experienced God.

- Muso

Ahh .. well answered my learned friend. If only we ALL bothered to look at the context within which posts take place. Perhaps we might all be able to move on and not be unduly bogged down??

Why are you deleting my posts?


Making you the mod of a board doesnt make you the god of the board.



Dont do it.

Hey Muse .. you're not bad (for an Agnostic that is lol ) :P

Oh and Darkhall .. could we please move on? It's getting a tad tiresome. Ok??

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 2:26pm:

You don't need to experience 'God' to understand a religion.... Gods are (apparently) eternal supreme beings etc etc.. Religion, on the other hand, is a HUMAN attempt to explain or understand gods.... The rules, commandments, doctrines etc are human constructs....and as such are quite easy to understand.....

I'd argue that unless you experience God in some way, you can't understand a religion. I never did, but some people do.

I'm not making any statement about the nature or even existence of God here (and it really doesn't matter from my perspective) - just the experience.

Most people who are active followers of some religions talk of God working through them or some kind of personal relationship with God.  To them, it's more than just a dry framework of rules.

As an analogy, try to understand about dogs and you'll understand about God (no disrespect intended). From your perspective dogs serve no real purpose. They consume food and it costs money to maintain a dog properly. They defecate over your front lawn and they die after a relatively short period. So why bother with a dog? Many people do. Many people just can't see the attraction of having a creature that is slightly removed from a wild predator in their homes.

Unless you have had a dog, then you will never  understand dogs.

A question for you - Do dogs exist in the way that dog owners believe them to?

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

Hey Muse .. you're not bad (for an Agnostic that is lol ) :P Oh and Darkhall .. could we please move on? It's getting a tad tiresome. Ok??

I'm an Ignostic, but I like religions in the same way that I like people.

Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignosticism


Quote:

It can be defined as encompassing two related views about the existence of god:   1. The view that a coherent definition of god must be presented before the question of the existence of god can be meaningfully discussed. Furthermore, if that definition is unfalsifiable, the ignostic takes the theological noncognitivist position that the question of the existence of god (per that definition) is meaningless. In this case, the concept of god is not considered meaningless; the term "god" is considered meaningless.   2. The second view is synonymous with theological noncognitivism, and skips the step of first asking "What is meant by 'god'?" before proclaiming the original question "Does god exist?" as meaningless.

A question for you - Do dogs exist in the way that dog owners believe them to?

- Muse

Now the topic's gone to the dogs! Ah well .. it was bound to happen lol :P

An Ignostic???

Huh???

muso wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:10pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 29th, 2010 at 2:26pm: You don't need to experience 'God' to understand a religion.... Gods are (apparently) eternal supreme beings etc etc.. Religion, on the other hand, is a HUMAN attempt to explain or understand gods.... The rules, commandments, doctrines etc are human constructs....and as such are quite easy to understand..... I'd argue that unless you experience God in some way, you can't understand a religion. I never did, but some people do.

But as an ignostic isnt saying "unless you experience god" as meaningless as saying "does god exist" ?

darkhall67 wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:15pm:

But as an ignostic isnt saying "unless you experience god" as meaningless as saying "does god exist" ?

 I'm talking about the experience of God held by believers.

muso wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:10pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 29th, 2010 at 2:26pm: You don't need to experience 'God' to understand a religion.... Gods are (apparently) eternal supreme beings etc etc.. Religion, on the other hand, is a HUMAN attempt to explain or understand gods.... The rules, commandments, doctrines etc are human constructs....and as such are quite easy to understand..... I'd argue that unless you experience God in some way, you can't understand a religion. I never did, but some people do. I'm not making any statement about the nature or even existence of God here (and it really doesn't matter from my perspective) - just the experience. Most people who are active followers of some religions talk of God working through them or some kind of personal relationship with God.  To them, it's more than just a dry framework of rules. As an analogy, try to understand about dogs and you'll understand about God (no disrespect intended). From your perspective dogs serve no real purpose. They consume food and it costs money to maintain a dog properly. They defecate over your front lawn and they die after a relatively short period. So why bother with a dog? Many people do. Many people just can't see the attraction of having a creature that is slightly removed from a wild predator in their homes. Unless you have had a dog, then you will never  understand dogs. A question for you - Do dogs exist in the way that dog owners believe them to?

And I'd argue exactly the opposite...

It's not necessary to have had a dog, in order to understand the concept of pets...

The 'idea' of anything doesn't actually require real, firsthand experience to understand it...

I haven't ever given birth to a child....but I understand the concept of 'children'....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:25pm:

And I'd argue exactly the opposite... It's not necessary to have had a dog, in order to understand the concept of pets... The 'idea' of anything doesn't actually require real, firsthand experience to understand it... I haven't ever given birth to a child....but I understand the concept of 'children'....

What I'm trying to get across is that different experiences influence our beliefs and attitudes.

The concept of a dog as a pet has nothing to do with the attitudes and the feelings that a pet owner has towards his dog. (in some cases)

I'm an athiest.
I've read the Bible.
I've also read The Hobbit.
I got more from The Hobbit.

Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:32pm:

I'm an athiest. I've read the Bible. I've also read The Hobbit. I got more from The Hobbit.

The Hobbit was fun. I've never read the Bible from cover to cover.

muso wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:31pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 29th, 2010 at 4:25pm: And I'd argue exactly the opposite... It's not necessary to have had a dog, in order to understand the concept of pets... The 'idea' of anything doesn't actually require real, firsthand experience to understand it... I haven't ever given birth to a child....but I understand the concept of 'children'.... What I'm trying to get across is that different experiences influence our beliefs and attitudes. The concept of a dog as a pet has nothing to do with the attitudes and the feelings that a pet owner has towards his dog. (in some cases)

Fair enough...but it's still NOT necessary to have 'spoken to God' to understand or accept the concept of religious faith...

Lisa do NOT delete my posts.


This is not the yahoo messageboard.

I read the Bible on the train going to and from work. It's funny how many people stare at you reading the Bible on the train.  

Well .. as it so happens .. I've read BOTH The Hobbit AND The Bible cover to cover .. at age 12 <-- we had long Christmas breaks back then ok lol :)

Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:45pm:

I read the Bible on the train going to and from work. It's funny how many people stare at you reading the Bible on the train.

Experience has probably taught them that you will either start yabbering on about how jesus has saved you or pull out a gun and go on a spree.




Either way , their caution is understandable.

Hey has anyone seen Darkhall??

He hasn't responded to this earlier post of mine as yet:

That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers".

If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point.

- Darkhall67

Perhaps you ought to take another look at the survey in your OP. It doesn't support what you've just stated.

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:48pm:

Hey has anyone seen Darkhall?? He hasn't responded to this earlier post of mine as yet: That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers". If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point. - Darkhall67 Perhaps you ought to take another look at the survey in your OP. It doesn't support what you've just stated.

And how do I know that if I answer you wont delete the post?

This is the point in your life where you're gonna have to exercise a bit of TRUST, BELIEF and A LITTLE FAITH for once.. ok Darkhall :)

Besides which .. it's a great topic .. and you're its author. Right??

"Lisa wrote on Today at 1:13pm:
Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality.

- Muso

Yeah .. that's so true!

Some of my best friends are Agnostics or Atheists .. interestingly enough .. they possess a good religious knowledge base .. but that's about it.  "


"That's about it"?   So are you saying that their knowledge of religion and religious issues is good but they dont possess much knowledge in other subjects?

Or that they have a good knowledge of religious issues but dont possess much spirituality?

Or that they possess a good knowledge of religious issues but dont possess the ethical and moral values that religious belief supposedly imbues?i
And would you please answer my question posted earlier.

I am particularly seeking clarity on the "but that's about it" part.

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 5:01pm:

This is the point in your life where you're gonna have to exercise a bit of TRUST, BELIEF and A LITTLE FAITH for once.. ok Darkhall :)

Some people learn that banging your head against a wall hurts , and so they soon stop.


That will happen on this particular messageboard if you keep deleting posts of mine.


At least have the balls to post a little "POST DELETED" sign so other people will know what's going on.


None of my posts , both here and in yahoo land ever warranted a deletion.

That was already answered and dealt with Darkhall .. read back. Ok?

Oh and I am asking (again) that you move on.  

I have finally gotten on to the actual pew research website after trying for several hours to see the survey in full.



Here's a link if other people were having trouble like me;

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1745/religious-knowledge-in-america-survey-atheists-agnostics-score-highest?src=prc-latest&proj=peoplepress




According to the survey atheist/agnostic knowledge of the bible and christianity came third behind the specific denominations of mormons and white evangelicals.


The atheist/agnostic result beat christians as a whole 6.7 to 6.2.

I suspect that it is a combination of atheists being better read and more open to the exchange of competing ideas as well as in my case searching for many years for something to centre a/my world view around and found them all pretty much wanting.

Also the fact that I believe a great many things but not God and accepted that position. I do like Taoism the most because the idea that the universe has a rythym or harmony strikes a chord with me...bad pun intended. It is sort of nicely Pythagoran to my way of thinking.

The Holy Bible is a mess, I don't recommend it as a read. Genisis and Sermon on the Mount are nice though.

Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 4:32pm:

I'm an athiest. I've read the Bible. I've also read The Hobbit. I got more from The Hobbit.

+1

That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers".

If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point.

- Darkhall67

Perhaps you ought to take another look at the survey in your OP. It doesn't support what you've just stated.

Please allow me to elaborate further .. the actual survey in YOUR OP stated this:

On questions about the Bible and Christianity, Mormons and white evangelical Protestants scored the highest, while Jews, atheists and agnostics trumped the other faiths on their knowledge of Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism.

So Darkhall .. you were saying ... ????

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 5:19pm:

That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers". If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point. - Darkhall67 Perhaps you ought to take another look at the survey in your OP. It doesn't support what you've just stated. Please allow me to elaborate further .. the actual survey in YOUR OP stated this: On questions about the Bible and Christianity, Mormons and white evangelical Protestants scored the highest, while Jews, atheists and agnostics trumped the other faiths on their knowledge of Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism. So Darkhall .. you were saying ... ????

Yep . Read that lisa.

and;

According to the survey atheist/agnostic knowledge of the bible and christianity came third behind the specific denominations of mormons and white evangelicals.


The atheist/agnostic result beat christians as a whole 6.7 to 6.2.

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 5:19pm:

That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers". If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point. - Darkhall67 Perhaps you ought to take another look at the survey in your OP. It doesn't support what you've just stated. Please allow me to elaborate further .. the actual survey in YOUR OP stated this: On questions about the Bible and Christianity, Mormons and white evangelical Protestants scored the highest, while Jews, atheists and agnostics trumped the other faiths on their knowledge of Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism. So Darkhall .. you were saying ... ????

I thought he was saying this topic title
Quote:

Atheists, Jews top religious knowledge survey

Darkhall .. ok and thanks for replying :)

Can you not see that the OVERALL RESULT in that survey encompasses other criteria which are not relevant  to what we were talking about earlier?

Namely .. this:

You stated:

"the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers"."

BUT the article itself in your OP stated this:

"On questions about the Bible and Christianity, Mormons and white evangelical Protestants scored the highest"

THAT is what I am trying to point out here.

At the end of the day .. it's ONE survey and as such .. it really doesn't mean much ( to me in any event ).

I was merely pointing out an inconsistency I noted in your response Darkhall.

.. and I very rarely see inconsistencies in your (on topic) posts.

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 3:58pm:

Religious knowledge has very little to do with personal religious belief, and even less to do with spirituality. - Muso Having been raised in a religious family, I disagree. The knowledge and soul feed the belief. - Sapho Well this discussion is now getting interesting. I too have been raised within a religious family/extended family environment .. and I've seen how religious knowledge can be helpful in some instances .. but not in all.

Without an example of what you are talking about... I can't comment. However, for a person example, sancity of life prevented my having an abortion and caused my becoming a mother at 16 years of age. I cannot say that it was either helpful or not... Age, innocence and naivity did not make me a bad mother of infants and young children. Learning, morality and a vested interest in the role of raising adults, did make me a good mother in the latter years of their upbringing. The religion itself I questioned and had always questioned, but the religious upbringing did cause me to seek morality from humanist idealogues, consider the various approaches, choose a couple that suited my pragmatism and then act as a moral agent in the world. People talk about the high morals as an anathma, but i would rather see people both religious and non religious seeking to be more moral which is something not so fashionable nowadays.

Even the truly religious or the ethicist can fall from moral grace, but the truth of that morality is their ownership of that moral fall and a desire evidenced in actions to avoid such a fall again. To think about why we have deviated from the morality we choose, and how we can avert such a happening, then acting in accordance with those thoughts and decisions is the true mark of a moral agent. Religion actually requires such behaviour from their faith base and social responsiblity and evolution demand it of all of us... pity we don't live up to the mark even though we could if we tried.  

Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2010 at 5:31pm:

Darkhall .. ok and thanks for replying :) Can you not see that the OVERALL RESULT in that survey encompasses other criteria which are not relevant  to what we were talking about earlier? Namely .. this: You stated: "the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers"." BUT the article itself in your OP stated this: "On questions about the Bible and Christianity, Mormons and white evangelical Protestants scored the highest" THAT is what I am trying to point out here. At the end of the day .. it's ONE survey and as such .. it really doesn't mean much ( to me in any event ). I was merely pointing out an inconsistency I noted in your response Darkhall. .. and I very rarely see inconsistencies in your (on topic) posts.

Ok I can see what you were going on about but on that post i said this ;

" If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point. "






That point is the one that the survey supports.

Ah ok Darkhall. Now .. this was your post to me:

That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers".

If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point.


Insofar as your 1st paragraph is concerned .. the survey you posted in your OP does not support what you are saying here. I've already covered this in earlier posts.

Now .. as regards your 2nd paragraph .. as it so happens .. the Atheists and Agnostics in my life tend to be highly intelligent people who hold influential positions within the community. These people chat to me all the time about the Bible. (I reckon it's because they've worked out that I know what's in it because I've bothered to read it from cover to cover).

The recurring observation is this: none of my Atheist or Agnostic friends have bothered to read the Bible for some strange reason. Instead ... they prefer to read thousands of articles and commentaries ABOUT the Bible (which I find annoying and puzzling at times). They then see fit to test/quiz me out on what's in the Bible .. and then they tend to compare what I say with what they've read.

Some very funny and interesting conversations have resulted lol.

The bottom line??? We have forged friendships based on mutual respect and trust. It's been very positive.

Having said that .. their knowledge and experience in Biblical matters and concerns still sux .. and I always tell them this. Meh .. they know but they laugh it off .. then ask me more questions lol :)

I don't mind being quizzed .. I'm used to it and it keeps me on my toes.

Ultimately Darkhall .. we're all learning something about ourselves and about each other.. and I believe that should be encouraged.

As an agnostic/atheist, I also have read the bible... not cover to cover, but quite a lot of it... what's more, I often return to it and re-read various aspects usually as a comparative exercise with some other myth I'm exploring at the time.  

Quote:

Re: Atheists, Jews top religious knowledge survey Reply #56 - Today at 7:05pm     Ah ok Darkhall. Now .. this was your post to me: That may be true with your friends but the point of the article and survey is that atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called "believers". If none of your atheist /agnostic friends have read it and are STILL more knowledgeable about it's contents than most christians , then that's a very telling point. Insofar as your 1st paragraph is concerned .. the survey you posted in your OP does not support what you are saying here. I've already covered this in earlier posts.

I'm afraid the survey does support Darkhall's assertion. While it says that Mormons and Evangelicals have a better knowledge of the bible than athiests etc, they are but a subset of the total Christian group (or to use Darkhall's terminology "believers").

Reading the actual survey, it says that Athiests etc came out ahead of the total Christian group (of which Mormons and Evangelicals are only a part) when it came to knowledge of the Bible and Christianity.

So from that we can ascertain that within the context of the survery that "atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called believers".

I'm afraid the survey does support Darkhall's assertion. While it says that Mormons and Evangelicals have a better knowledge of the bible than athiests etc, they are but a subset of the total Christian group (or to use Darkhall's terminology "believers").

Reading the actual survey, it says that Athiests etc came out ahead of the total Christian group (of which Mormons and Evangelicals are only a part) when it came to knowledge of the Bible and Christianity.

So from that we can ascertain that within the context of the survery that "atheists and agnostics have a wider knowledge of whats in the bible than so called believers".

- Life Goes On

Umm try reading the actual survey results again. Twice even .. because nothing you have posted agrees with it. K?

Here is the link for you:

http://pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-and-Practices/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey.aspx

Don't miss this section:

On questions about Christianity – including a battery of questions about the Bible – Mormons (7.9 out of 12 right on average) and white evangelical Protestants (7.3 correct on average) show the highest levels of knowledge.

Jews and atheists/agnostics stand out for their knowledge of other world religions, including Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism

[edit]Umm try reading the actual survey results again. Twice even .. because nothing you have posted agrees with it. K?
[/edit]

I have.
It plainly states that in regards to "knowledge of Christianity and the Bible" that the scores were as follows:

Christians (total group - including Mormons, catholics, protestants etc) 6.2

Athiests and Agnostics 6.7

Quote:

These are among the key findings of the U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey, a nationwide poll conducted from May 19 through June 6, 2010, among 3,412 Americans age 18 and older, on landlines and cell phones, in English and Spanish. Jews, Mormons and atheists/agnostics were oversampled to allow analysis of these relatively small groups

OK. I see that they oversampled atheists/agnostics to compensate for the small population size - good, but it says nothing about Jews. The population size for Jews would have been around 58.

The results are possibly valid for atheists depending on the oversampling, but 6.7 and 6.2 are very close.

Then we'd have to allow for the fact that most Atheists in the USA came from a Christian background, so their knowledge of the Bible would be fairly similar.

Also, if you look at the questions themselves, they are not all about Christianity. It's probably fair to say that somebody immersed in a Christian culture wouldn't know as much about other religions.

Other questions are pretty generic- for example:

What the Public Knows About Religion
At least two-thirds know…
Public school teachers cannot lead class
in prayer 89%
Atheist is someone who does not believe
in God 85
Mother Teresa was Catholic 82
Moses was the Bible figure who led
the exodus from Egypt 72
Jesus was born in Bethlehem 71
Constitution says government shall neither
establish nor interfere with religion 68
Most people in Pakistan are Muslim 68


So on the whole, I don't think this survey shows conclusively that Atheists and Agnostics know more about the Christian religion than the average Christian.  If you look at the elements in the full report, the emphasis of the survey is not fully on Christianity.

It's gratifying to see that they used the generally accepted definition of Atheist (well from a monotheistic perspective at least):


Quote:

Atheism and Agnosticism Is an atheist someone who does NOT believe in God, believes in God, or is unsure whether God exists?