Are people who are atheist/agnostic and were raised up in religious families more intelligent on average? Pic not related
Who are these semon demons?
>>7864212
Can't hate on that costume
>>7864212
Based on my limited experience, no. The religious-raised atheist-turned people I know are average or slightly below average.
>>7864344
Wanna bet? I'll give this thread 10 more posts until we get some guy raging about women and science, or "pop-sci" people.
>>7864366
I'm surprised it's not already happened.
>>7864212
That's kinda cute.
so...her vagina may or may not be dead?
I'm not sure she thought that through...
>>7864212
What a sweet costume idea
>>7864212
>People use religion for social gatherings / connections
>OP thinks he's profoundly genius for not believing in biblical stories
>in reality is a moron
Go hit up some of those Atheist meetings and getting those job offers for attending the same Atheist schools as your fellow Atheist charity organizers, dipshit
>the pussy in the box
y-you too..
>>7864376
>implying because someone follows the same cult, they deserve adornments
>>7864212
What is intelligence? I know a guy with a degree in medicine but also thinks if more people owned guns they would stop shootings (this has never been demonstrated / would not offset shootings).
I know an atheist engineer who is a social retard.
I know a religious person who is great at alot of different accepts that would make him 'successful' or 'worldly' and is a hit with everyone.
It's hard to say what intelligence is and your understanding of intelligence is probably bias towards groups or individuals who may or may not have faith.
But as another poster thread, ones who have been brought up religious but through their own critical thinking, abandon their beliefs, I find are intrinsically smarter than others and generally make most decisions based on either pervious experience that has worked or make educated assumptions / plans.
>>7864376
>OP thinks he's profoundly genius for not believing in biblical stories
You don't have to be smart to reject them, but you do have to be an idiot not to. Which it sounds like you agree with even though you don't want to.
>>7864212
they are more intelligent, but less happy
>>7864212
Fagnostics tend to be less intelligent. They are even too dumb to answer a simple "yes or no" question.
>>7864344
But I can definitely hate on the disgusting sluts.
>>7864370
Her vagina's wavefunction has been collapsed so many times that "dead" is a severe understatement in describing this horribly stinking hell hole.
>>7864408
>What is intelligence?
IQ, you fucking brainlet. This is a science board, so we use the scientific definition and not some facebook tier SJW bullshit about "social intelligence".
>>7864428
>psychology
>science
>>>/trash/
People who are atheist tend to be less intelligent in general. They're only atheist because it is fashionable. Like being a vegetarian or SJW.
Agnosticism is the path of the intelligent.
>>7864455
the /pol/ is strong in this one
>>7864457
The other way round, you fucktard. Atheists are free thinkers while fagnostics are beta cuck retards who are too afraid they might hurt some religious group's feelings by admitting that they don't believe in sky wizards.
>>7864212
No, but they are certainly nearly as much slutty as women raised by a catholic german family.
>>7864212
I am one of the religious-raised atheist-turned people and I see a lot of religious people who are very clearly way more intelligent than me. Its like when talking about religion they suddenly forget everything about logic, it is sooo baffling.
I think we don't really understand why almost every society came up with religion and why exactly people follow religion
>>7864457
Atheism and agnosticism are barely different now, since most atheists take a scientific, not a philosophical/purely logical approach to atheism. Being a scientific atheist (I don't believe in it because there is no evidence, but of course as a scientist I can't rule anything out) is effectively agnostic but the terms ar now muddled, for better of for worse. Trying to divide people into atheists and agnostics is a bit silly (unless we are talking about agnostics who are actually just like "umm,, I'm not sure!").
>>7864212
Surprisingly, and I think anyone who actually works in math or physics academia will agree with me, the mathematicians and physicists who actually believe in God are usually brilliant people, who don't talk about their religion much. I think it's sort of a necessity--you have to be really smart to still stick to religion after being a talented successful academic in order to not get swayed. It's like how in my NYC high school, conservatives tended to be the most well educated when it came to politics, but when I moved to South Carolina, the majority of liberals were the one who were super smart.
>>7864408
this. i know a guy currently in med school that played the stock market in undergrad. he took a loan of $75000 that almost didnt sell. had a panic attack until it did. then tried to get me to play stocks with him.
had near perfect grades and never tried too. i honestly cant remember the last time i ever saw him open a textbook or look at notes or anything for that matter.
>>7864408
>What is intelligence? I know a guy with a degree in medicine but also thinks if more people owned guns they would stop shootings (this has never been demonstrated / would not offset shootings).
>military officers get shot in gun free zones
>professor stops mass shooter with his own gun
>Paris 128 people died because no one shot back
Yeah what a moron
>>7864212
>>7864540
>the mathematicians and physicists who actually believe in God are usually brilliant people, who don't talk about their religion much.
I was raised in religios family and environmet. Based on my own experience, if we define religion as a virus, everything makes sense. Only of course more of a mental virus.
First hear out my reasoning. A virus, whether a normal kind, or a computer virus, first infects his host. Once it makes itself at home, it tries to spread it's self to other hosts. As seen when people try to convert other people.
Now when someone is infected their immune system is weakened. Which explains the fact how they are more susceptible to paranormal and spiritual beliefs and conspiracy theories.
Someone in academia can't afford to spend their mental resources on fighting this infection. They need all these resources to do their work, which kinda explains why they remain with religion. Deep down they want to get rid of it, but they are stuck with it, and have learned to live with it. Like when you want to get a divorce, but can't be bothered to spend years on stupid procedures, so you just remain married
>>7864575
>similar to a virus
>can apply the same reasoning to animals, humans, and plants
>hurrrrrrrr
>>7864564
>muh anecdotes
Purrdy cool anon.
Mochizuki Tier: Buddhism
Intelligent Tier: Agnostic, Taoism
Pretentious Tier: Atheism
Brainlet Tier: Abrahamic Religions
Meme Tier: Paganism
>>7864586
Campus douchebag detected. Do you bring an acoustic guitar everywhere you go?
>>7864586
Reddit pls go.
Red pill tier: islam, judaism
Neutral tier; atheism, hinduism
Kill yourself, you're a cuck tier: agnosticism, christianity
>>7864575
Was your computer built by chance? No, it had many different people from different corporations designing it. It was all planned and built according to plan. The same type of thinking can apply to buildings, are sheds naturally occuring? No. You first need to build the foundation and then structure everything as planned. There was a designer behind it. This could also apply to the universe, there had to be some entity that created this, to say the universe was always here is just being ignorant. There had to be some starting point and eventually some ending point.
>>7864585
http://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/
>>7864595
>building was designed
>therefore the whole universe was designed
Pretty huge leap of logic there. I don't quite see how you managed to jump that far
>>7864465
Edgy
>>7864599
>universe expanding/changing from a single point of creation
>religious personalities simply infer that single point of creation (big bang) was a result of God
>being so knuckle-draggingly stupid to not get this
>goes to /sci/ even though he's as dumb as a pile of rubble
Gtfo reeeeeeeeeeeeee
>>7864616
Now, again, only in English.
>>7864616
That's not what religions say and that's not what you said either. A "first cause" is a dubious concept, but equivocating it with some kind of mythological character is knuckle-draggingly stupid.
>>7864621
How about you use correct grammar, retard.
>Now, again. Only in English.
Free lesson for that low IQ, worthless cesspool of garbage you call a mind.
>>7864596
Did you read it all? They go on to talk about why the methods used in the study could be inaccurate.
>>7864623
>I say something
>"That's not what you said" in your reply to what I said
>What
You're also stupid.
>>7864626
Suck my dick, faggot
>>7864628
The theory of gravity can also be inaccurate.
>>7864557
dont be an idiot stock markets are largely random in such a short term, his performance neither proves or disproves his intelligence
>>7864403
Yes.
People protect their own interests by supporting those who share their values. Whats great about that is that it works a lot better for good guys. Bad guys suck at sharing.
Gee, you really should have figured that out much earlier in life.
>>7864629
Obviously I was referring to the previous retarded post about designing a shed..
>>7864635
What does any of that have to do with whether the bible is true?
>>7864642
>still doesnt get it
>>7864644
So explain.
>>7864652
You can lead a camel to water, but the camel only drinks root beer. Sometimes its better to let the camel succumb and drink the water than spend effort in traveling to buy the camel root beer. Do you understand?
>>7864212
Read somewhere that 8/10 of the highest IQd people on the planet consider themselves religious.
>>7864669
Advanced hardware with more prifessing power is more susceptible to viruses.
>>7864661
I don't understand why you can't say what you mean explicitly, no. You say (or rather imply, for some reason) that being a Christian comes with some social advtantages. But again, what does that have to do with whether the bible is true or not?
>>7864457
You are more retarded than them though
>>7864680
It doesn't, moron.
>>7864682
Then why do you keep saying it as an answer to that question?
>>7864690
hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
>>7864700
Yes, yes, I'm very stupid. So say what you mean.
>>7864591
>red pill
fuck off /pol/
>yfw god exists
>>7864784
Allahu akbar.
>>7864780
> triggered
back to /reddit/
>>7864792
Red pill is from reddit. /pol/ just likes it because they're an even bigger circle jerk than reddit is.
>>7864212
I would collapse her wavefunction if you know what I mean
>>7864212
By and large, the people I know who grew up religious and then rejected it always do so on fairly silly, elementary reasons. You rarely ever see anybody do that who had a firm grasp on their religion to begin with or who has a firm grasp on the atheist/agnosticism they're turning to. It's always trite, tumblr-style quotes that supposedly expose how horrible religion is while simultaneously extolling the amazing virtues of their new realization. Those people generally act like it's all plain and simple, when anybody who is intellectually honest will recognize the strengths and weaknesses of each side, no matter where they end up falling.
>>7864465
Protip: Agnostics still don't believe in God. They just admit that they can't deny him either.
>>7864806
>You rarely ever see anybody do that who had a firm grasp on their religion to begin with or who has a firm grasp on the atheist/agnosticism they're turning to.
Actually, numerous studies have shown that atheists and agnostics know more about religion than religious people, on average. Look it up.
>>7864812
>numerous studies have shown
Always a reflag that bullshit statements are forthcoming.
>Look it up.
No. That's not how it fucking works. You want to make a claim and claim that your position is well-supported by "numerous studies," then you have the burden of showing it.
>>7864808
>Agnostics don't believe they are wrong, they just admit they're not incorrect either.
Just chuck that ideology in with "I'm spiritual, but not religious" and "I just watch the superbowl for the commercials"
>>7864828
>trying to troll this hard
Oh, come on. I thought we had slightly higher standards here on /sci/. If you're going to troll, put a little subtlety into it. That was way too heavy handed.
>>7864828
agnosticism : we cant know nuthin
atheism : god doesn't exist. i died and saw for myself
spirituality : a creator makes sense, there are more than meets the eye
>>7864422
Found the dogmatic dimwit.
>>7864819
Or you could just fucking google it because I'm on mobile.
>All these plebs discussing a meaningless issue
>they don't realize the Buddhism is the best belief system
>yfw Buddhism is unconcerned with the question of God because God is completely irrelevant to the path of enlightenment, which concerns only oneself.
sci is pleb as fuck.
>>7864934
>thing is true!
>okay, prove it.
>NO YOU PROVE WHAT I CLAIMED IS TRUE!
Well done.
>>7864976
Actually, you claimed something was true first, I guess based on anecdotes/bias. I just pointed out there wad actual data showing the opposite to be helpful, assuming you could follow up yourself if you cared.
But since apparently this is a "debate," I'll google "atheist religious knowledge" and give you the link to the first result:
http://www.pewforum.org/2010/09/28/u-s-religious-knowledge-survey/
Sorry to have tried to give you such a terrible burden!
>>7865017
Almost, but not quite. Nobody ever made a claim that non-religious people didn't know as much as religious people. You wanted to make that point, and you've been pushing it, but it was never really in contention.
The original allegation was that people who left organized religion of their childhood and moved towards atheism weren't thinking deeply about their religion or their atheism.
Go back to the original post that set you off: >>7864806
Read it again. You're arguing against something that was never there.
That Pew Forum study doesn't really address that issue at all.
>>7864212
>find the position of beta orbiters using the probability of sexual energy
>>7864424
Underated
No. As an agnostic raised by a catholic family, I can testify to being fucking retarded.
>>7864212
No, some of the retarded Protestantism rubs off on them. See how OP overgeneralizes Protestantism into all religion.
>>7865052
So what's not retarded then? Islam?
>>7864422
>>7864457
>>7864465
>>7864535
REMINDER that (a)gnosticism and (a)theism refer to: your perceived level of certainty in your belief (gnosticism =certain, agnosticism =uncertain and therefore reasonable), and whether you're theistic or not. (a)gnosticism =how you believe, (a)theism = what you believe.
They're not mutually exclusive.
Im fact, both are required to more accurately describe beliefs
>>7864212
>be born in an extremely religious household
>develop keen interest for the sciences
>parents heavily oppose
>secretly study chem while they weren't looking
>learn everything from stoichiometry to equilibriums at the age of 14
>move out at 18
>get accepted into ivy league school
I believe it just depends on the person, anon.
>>7865084
>>7865125
>>parents heavily oppose
>lying on the internet
Don't you have better things to do than making up imaginary livejournal posts?
>>7865134
>implying
there were as devout as Mormons
>>7865125
>learn everything from stoichiometry to equilibria at age of 14
Are you... bragging?
>>7864513
>Its like when talking about religion they suddenly forget everything about logic
this is called "intellectual dishonesty"
>>7865149
>>I overcome such adversity to major in science
>>I'm super cereal you guys
No religious family would have qualm with a son majoring in chemistry. Either you're making it up or really tripled majored in Women's Studies, Sexuality Studies, and Gender Studies.
>>7865127
Whence this meme?
>>7865170
I didn't really believe in anything they taught me about the bible and so I would skip sunday school, not preform prayers, and no do anything religious in general. My parents say that and tried to get me to do more religious things. They eventually found out that my non-religiousness was caused by my love of sciences and so they took away all of my chemicals and books and forced me to participate in religious activities.
>>7865187
They weren't angry about the science you edgy shitlord. They were bothered by you not following religion, and, based on your posting, likely you were a little fucking snot about it. If you were a better son they wouldn't give two shits about you studying chemistry.
>>7865208
>implying i want to sit through 4 hours of a guy talking and attend bible studies every sunday
STUDIES OF STUDENTS
Thomas Howells, 1927
Study of 461 students showed religiously conservative students "are, in general, relatively inferior in intellectual ability."
Hilding Carlsojn, 1933
Study of 215 students showed that "there is a tendency for the more intelligent undergraduate to be sympathetic toward atheism."
Abraham Franzblau, 1934
Confirming Howells and Carlson, tested 354 Jewish children, aged 10-16. Found a negative correlation between religiosity and IQ as measured by the Terman intelligence test.
Thomas Symington, 1935
Tested 400 young people in colleges and church groups. He reported, "There is a constant positive relation in all the groups between liberal religious thinking and mental ability… There is also a constant positive relation between liberal scores and intelligence…"
Vernon Jones, 1938
Tested 381 students, concluding "a slight tendency for intelligence and liberal attitudes to go together."
A. R. Gilliland, 1940
Contrary to all other studies, found "little or no relationship between intelligence and attitude toward god."
Donald Gragg, 1942
Reported an inverse correlation between 100 ACE freshman test scores and Thurstone "reality of god" scores.
Brown and Love, 1951
At the University of Denver, tested 613 male and female students. The mean test scores of non-believers was 119 points, and for believers it was 100. The non-believers ranked in the 80th percentile, and believers in the 50th. Their findings "strongly corroborate those of Howells."
Michael Argyle, 1958
Concluded that "although intelligent children grasp religious concepts earlier, they are also the first to doubt the truth of religion, and intelligent students are much less likely to accept orthodox beliefs."
Jeffrey Hadden, 1963
Found no correlation between intelligence and grades. This was an anomalous finding, since GPA corresponds closely with intelligence. Other factors may have influenced the results at the University of Wisconsin.
Young, Dustin and Holtzman, 1966
Average religiosity decreased as GPA rose.
James Trent, 1967
Polled 1400 college seniors. Found little difference, but high-ability students in his sample group were over-represented.
Plant and E. Minium, 1967
The more intelligent students were less religious, both before entering college and after 2 years of college.
Robert Wuthnow, 1978
Of 532 students, 37 percent of Christians, 58 percent of apostates, and 53 percent of non-religious scored above average on SATs.
Hastings and Hoge, 1967, 1974
Polled 200 college students and found no significant correlations.
Norman Poythress, 1975
Mean SATs for strongly anti-religious (1148), moderately anti-religious (1119), slightly anti-religious (1108), and religious (1022).
Wiebe and Fleck, 1980
Studied 158 male and female Canadian university students. They reported "nonreligious S's tended to be strongly intelligent" and "more intelligent than religious S's."
>>7865208
>If you were a better son
Sounds to me like anon had shitty parents, actually.
STUDENT BODY COMPARISONS
Rose Goldsen, 1952
Percentage of students who believe in a divine god: Harvard 30; UCLA 32; Dartmouth 35; Yale 36; Cornell 42; Wayne 43; Weslyan 43; Michigan 45; Fisk 60; Texas 62; North Carolina 68.
National Review Study, 1970
Percentage of students who believe in a Spirit or Divine God: Reed 15; Brandeis 25; Sarah Lawrence 28; Williams 36; Stanford 41; Boston U. 41; Yale 42; Howard 47; Indiana 57; Davidson 59; S. Carolina 65; Marquette 77.
Caplovitz and Sherrow, 1977
Apostasy rates rose continuously from 5 percent in "low" ranked schools to 17 percent in "high" ranked schools.
Niemi, Ross, and Alexander, 1978
In elite schools, organized religion was judged important by only 26 percent of their students, compared with 44 percent of all students.
STUDIES OF VERY-HIGH IQ GROUPS
Terman, 1959
Studied group with IQ's over 140. Of men, 10 percent held strong religious belief, of women 18 percent. Sixty-two percent of men and 57 percent of women claimed "little religious inclination" while 28 percent of the men and 23 percent of the women claimed it was "not at all important."
Warren and Heist, 1960
Found no differences among National Merit Scholars. Results may have been effected by the fact that NM scholars are not selected on the basis of intelligence or grades alone, but also on "leadership" and such like.
Southern and Plant, 1968
Studied 42 male and 30 female members of Mensa. Mensa members were much less religious in belief than the typical American college alumnus or adult.
STUDIES Of SCIENTISTS
William S. Ament, 1927
C. C. Little, president of the University of Michigan, checked persons listed in Who's Who in America: "Unitarians, Episcopalians, Congregationalists, Universalists, and Presbyterians [who are less religious] are… far more numerous in Who's Who than would be expected on the basis of the population which they form. Baptists, Methodists, and Catholics are distinctly less numerous." Ament confirmed Little's conclusion. He noted that Unitarians, the least religious, were more than 40 times as numerous in Who's Who as in the U.S. population.
Lehman and Witty, 1931
Identified 1189 scientists found in both Who's Who (1927) and American Men of Science (1927). Only 25 percent of those listed in the latter and 50 percent of those in the former reported their religious denomination, despite the specific request to do so, under the heading of "religious denomination (if any)." Well over 90 percent of the general population claims religious affiliation. The figure of 25 percent suggests far less religiosity among scientists. Unitarians were 81.4 times as numerous among eminent scientists as non-Unitarians.
Kelley and Fisk, 1951
Found a negative (-.39) correlation between the strength of religious values and research competence. [How these were measured is unknown.]
>>7865187
>my non-religiousness was caused by my love of sciences
That is a non sequitur. It makes no more sense than saying "my non-interest in poetry was caused by my love of history".
>they took away all of my chemicals
Why is a child playing with chemicals in the first place? They aren't toys to be messing around with haphazardly.
Ann Roe, 1953
Interviewed 64 "eminent scientists, nearly all members of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences or the American Philosophical Society. She reported that, while nearly all of them had religious parents and had attended Sunday school, 'now only three of these men are seriously active in church. A few others attend upon occasion, or even give some financial support to a church which they do not attend… All the others have long since dismissed religion as any guide to them, and the church plays no part in their lives… A few are militantly atheistic, but most are just not interested.'"
Francis Bello, 1954
Interviewed or questionnaired 107 nonindustrial scientists under the age of 40 judged by senior colleagues to be outstanding. Of the 87 responses, 45 percent claimed to be "agnostic or atheistic" and an additional 22 percent claimed no religious affiliation. For 20 most eminent, "the proportion who are now a-religious is considerably higher than in the entire survey group."
Jack Chambers, 1964
Questionnaired 740 US psychologists and chemists. He reported, "The highly creative men… significantly more often show either no preference for a particular religion or little or no interest in religion." Found that the most eminent psychologists showed 40 percent no preference, 16 percent for the most eminent chemists.
Vaughan, Smith, and Sjoberg, 1965
Polled 850 US physicists, zoologists, chemical engineers, and geologists listed in American Men of Science (1955) on church membership, and attendance patterns, and belief in afterlife. Of the 642 replies, 38.5 percent did not believe in an afterlife, whereas 31.8 percent did. Belief in immortality was less common among major university staff than among those employed by business, government, or minor universities. The Gallup poll taken about this time showed that two-thirds of the U.S. population believed in an afterlife, so scientists were far less religious than the typical adult.
>>7865259
>That is a non sequitur.
That is the politically correct thing to say, but it's not really true. If his parents were indeed "extremely religious," they probably held numerous beliefs that were heavily contradicted by scientific findings, e.g. biblical literalism. And even philosophically, religious dogmatism and scientific empiricism are hard to fit together without a lot of cognitive dissonance. Yes, people can study science and remain religious and many do, but it's disingenuous to say there isn't conflict.
>>7865242
>>7865245
Here's a quick test using millions of people as subjects.
Iceland is 99% atheist.
The state of Massachusetts has a better public education ranking as well as a higher IQ than Iceland. About 10 points higher.
Massachusetts beats Iceland education in every field, especially relevant ones such as math.
Most people who live in Massachusetts are religious.
>>7865274
>extremely religious
>biblical literalism
Protestantism is not representative of all religions. You can be extremely religious and not an idiot.
> And even philosophically, religious dogmatism and scientific empiricism are hard to fit together without a lot of cognitive dissonance
No, that's the conflict thesis and it has been thoroughly debunked a century ago. Philosophically, physics and metaphysics are completely disjoint and not in conflict with each other. Science can't say anything in favor or against religion.
>>7865127
AVE MARIA
>>7865127
>dont you worship mary?
>Lol u arent christians
>>7865287
>ignore these dozens of studies, take a look at my two data points!
And Iceland isn't even on that list you stupid faggot. This has to be b8.
>>7865411
>protestants vs catholics is a dank new meme
Yeah they just started arguing on 4chan last Friday, they loved each other for centuries before that.
>>7865425
Tbh when I was Catholic, protestants kept pushing the notion that I wasn't Christian because some bullshit about Mary. Shit drove me up fucking walls hearing this disgusting afterbirth of Catholicism spew such inane heresy.
>>7865444
>>7865425
>last Friday
Actually its a common thing in the real world. Protestants are getting really uppity these days(60 years or so.)
People that can go against household belifs usually have stronger critical thinking skills. Considering they are not 15 year old edgy faggs. But that would mean the converse could be true, but
>>7865260
>>7865253
Shows evidence for the one sided view. However, religion per se is probably not to blame but how religion is thought and the zealous methods used in some households.
>>7865425
Not vs Catholics, vs. "Christians." The meme would be pretending to be a reformation-era Catholic on 4chan in the 21st century.
>>7865463
There are Catholics out there who are still serious about their religion.
>>7865463
Protestantism is full of heresy:
>Denying Christ (through the Eucharist)
>Denying the Holy Bible (by denying the deuterocanonical books, Luther calling for the burning of the Epistle of James)
>Denying the teaching of the Apostles (rejecting Tradition)
>Denying the communion of Saints
>Denying purgatory and praying for the dead
>Demonizing Mary
>Desecrating effigies of God, Jesus, Mary, Saints, and destroying biblical depictions and crucifixes
>The rapture
>Creationism
>The Earth is 6000 years old
>Anti-science
>Prosperity gospel
>Usury is OKay!
>Once saved, always saved
>Just need to say you're Christian/believe in Jesus to be saved
>Predestination (born with a silver spoon and golden crucifix going to heaven or born poor and going to hell)
>Jews are God's chosen people (free from any blemishes and we all must be subservient to them and Israel)
>Schism is actively encouraged and readily practiced
>Rejection of all theology in favor of a shallow believe whatever you want to believe nonsense
>Personal relationship with Jesus trumps all (including the bible and church) telling you everything you need to know so don't ask them preachers questions
>"Born again" virgins
>"Call no one father"
>Completely reject Jesus' incredibly clear teachings on marriage and divorce (see Matthew 19:1-12) by allowing anyone to marry and divorce
>Rejecting the millennia-old Christian teachings on abortion
>Rejecting God's plan of female mothers giving birth to human life and male priests giving birth to spiritual life (through mass and the sacraments)
>Denying any and all sacraments
>Denying the Divinity of Christ and Trinity
>Denying apostolic succession and allowing uneducated laity to preach (universal priesthood of all believers)
>Speaking gibberish and calling it tongues
>In league with the devil by wanting to rebuild a third temple for the Jews so they can bring about the end of the world and all its sufferings asap
>Referring to God or Jesus as female
>>7865489
Sticking to catholic dogma leads to
>Poor people who can't get loans to start businesses
>AIDS and unwanted kids because no condoms
>Unhappy marriages because no divorce
>"Pay the priest enough money and you're saved!"
>Diddled kids
>>7865515
>>Poor people who can't get loans to start businesses
>implying payday loans and other usurious BS are a good thing
>>AIDS and unwanted kids because no condoms
don't fuck whores, don't get AIDS
>>Unhappy marriages because no divorce
don't marry haphazardly, don't get divorced
>>"Pay the priest enough money and you're saved!"
??? You don't have to pay a dime to be catholic
>>Diddled kids
>implying there aren't pedos in every profession
>>7864212
SO IS THERE A PUSSY OR A DICK
I MUST KNOW /SCI/
>>7864862
>spiritually:"i just know it!"
FTFY
>>7865530
>no masturbation
>no extramarital sex
>don't marry haphazardly
And in top of this
>just don't fuck up, it's not like human beings make mistakes
>>7867053
>spiritually: dude weed lmao pass the acoustic guitar
Ftfy
>>7864403
'deserve' is an incredibly irrelevant word in the real world, anon.
And even when it isn't, it's subjective.
>>7864424
wow, harsh, ouch.
>>7864623
Uh
He's not talking about religions.
He's talking about religious personalities; i.e., individuals who have reconciled scientific theory with religious beliefs.
I'm pretty sure what he's trying to say, is that there are plenty of people in the scientific and mathematical fields who have no problem believing that science/math (as we know them) are simply languages for expressing our comprehension, or lack thereof, of God's infinite (and infinitely complex) creation. The two things are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they may well be inclusive.
Wait sorry, that's what I said, not him.
Wait sorry, that's not what I said.
You know what I'm drunk and you gotta learn to fucking parse what you're reading.
>>7865530
>??? You don't have to pay a dime to be catholic
Not that guy, but I'm sure you've probably heard of tithes.
>>7865530
>you don't have to pay a dime to be Catholic
Yep, the Vatican was built through gods power alone
>>7868927
Only Mormons are required to pay 10% of their income in tithing. Catholics are completely free to not the give a dime to the church and use it on other things.
>>7864575
Richard, pls go.
>>7864408
>I know a guy in medicine but yah he's an idiot because he doesn't agree with my political beliefs
top lel
>>7864212
My family was all highly orthodox catholics who forced me to complete all of my communions before I became an Agnostic. Once at uni I took an IQ test and scored 142, but if you ask me that only determines how adept you are at taking the test itself. Intellegence is relative to your interests and genetics, not your religious upbringing.
>>7869336
>missing the point and attacking a strawman instead
>>7865515
>can't get loans
The collapse of the immoral banking system that enslaves the vulnerable with debt
>AIDs and unwanted kids
People forced to actually think about who they stick their dick into
>Unhappy marriages
People forced to work through problems, as they swore they would in their vows
>"pay the priest and you're saved"
nonsense
>diddled kids
A legitimate problem that also exists in every other branch of religion and government
>>7869379
>nonsense
wikipedia.org/wiki/Indulgence
Also, reguarding divorce.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
Catholics have the second fastest growth in divorce cases
>>7864212
There is a strong correlation between education and atheism, but education is only one form of intelligence.
If you mean things like intuition and reasoning, then no. A lot of things that are true are counter intuitive, meaning intuition and reason probably wouldn't get us there no matter how intelligent we were.
Seems a lot of people don't realize that atheism and agnosticism answer two completely different questions. Most non believers would be considered agnostic atheists. There are gnostic atheists, but they are rate, just as there are agnostic theists, but also rare.
Also, atheists still have beliefs, whether it's humanism, methodological naturalist, egalitarian, etc. Their atheism is a single position on a single issue, it's not a worldview.
>>7865303
>it has been thoroughly debunked a century ago
You're either a close minded snot or you haven't read nearly enough philosophy as you think you have.
>>7869436
>If you mean things like intuition and reasoning
People with higher IQs tend to be less religious.
>>7864408
>I know a guy with a degree in medicine but also thinks if more people owned guns they would stop shootings (this has never been demonstrated / would not offset shootings).
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/shooting-outside-draw-muhammad-contest-texas-n352996
gun ownership in texas - greater than 1 in 3
>>7864212
>Are people who are atheist/agnostic and were raised up in religious families more intelligent on average?
No, especially not (a)gnostics.
Let's break this down for 5 year olds.
Gnostics are just retarded.
Agnostics are too retarded to realize that agnosticism is the default position.
Some atheists are people that take statistical probability in account and conclude that it is highly unlikely that any religion has the correct answer. You might as well make up some random god and you'd have an equal chance of being right.
Other atheists just copy what they think is right by excluding what's wrong, which is the more retarded way of doing things, but ends up in the same place.
In conclusion: Everyone is a retard. Some atheists got it right. Agnostics are just confused and gnostics are just delusional.
>>7869611
Nice opinion you got there, sempai.
>>7864212
Why is the other girl pointing at the cat's belly?
>>7869611
why is agnosticism bad because its "default position"? whats a "default position" anyway?
>>7869623
Nobody knows anything when they are born.
Ergo, agnosticism is the default position.
The fact that I have to explain this is evidence of your stupidity.
>>7864212
I grew up in an Religious family, I was in a edgy Atheist phase until I turned 16, I ended up being valedictorian and getting my shit together after I became Christian too. Still regret that I ever went though that Atheist phase.
Atheists just want to be special little snowflakes, if you look around at the world and history you notice a lot of patterns.
I rate every non christian a Deus Vult! worthy/10
That is just my point of view.
>>7869646
If you think atheism is edgy, you're a retard.
>>7869651
It is pretty edgy.
>>7869655
You're pretty retarded.
>>7869660
Careful with your edge man.
>>7869671
Now you get it. Individuals are edgy.
Atheism is just the lack of a certain belief.
You might as well claim statistics are edgy.
Fucktard.
I think there is a pretty good chance that every single person in this thread is an atheist.
>>7869681
why do you write your posts in verses? you're the "let me break it to you like you're 5" anon aren't you
>>7869681
This is some serious Edge right here.
>>7869685
Maybe he is a foreigner, i guess.
>>7864564
>France
>1,800 firearms deaths per year
>USA
>32,000 firearms deaths per year
5 times the population, 18 times the firearms murders
Yes, It's totally worth it to stop one mass shooting
>>7869698
You don't get it dude.
All Americans should learn to fly jets, so next time airplanes are heading towards skyscrapers they can shoot them down before they even get close.
>>7869756
Kek.
>>7864408
>thinks gun control policies are obvious and that contrary opinions reflect idiocy
>relates social problems with intellect
>unintelligibly rambles about someone who's talented and successful, as if that has anything to do with intellectual capacities
>oblivious of psychological interpretations of intelligence yet confident enough to claim that there are none
Go away dude
>>7864595
eternal universe is retarded, don't you know that only yahweh is eternal? gah!!
complex physics requires an explanation, complex designer is self explanatory! gah!!
idiots amirite
>>7865170
I grew up as pretty conservative Christian. Most fundamental denominations, especially in America but also in 3rd world countries, think that the scientific community is run by people who create false evidence in order to remove the need for god because they want to live in sin. It's not a controversial opinion in a shit ton of churches I've attended personally. Though I've not encountered it myself, it's not hard at all for me to imagine a parent disprove of their kids going into science.
>>7869716
Are you purposefully giving pants-on-head retarded analogies to sway people towards less gun control?
>>7869646
>Still regret that I ever went though that Atheist phase.
If you didn't go all edglord for a while, you may not have become a Christian
>>7869845
True, I would not have experienced this from "another perspective" either, still you must repent your sins, It might have been necessary but it is nothing to be proud of.
>>7869839
>less gun control?
more
>>7864408
>I know a guy who doesn't believe in the same policies I do
What a fucking idiot
>>7869611
>Some atheists are people that take statistical probability in account and conclude that it is highly unlikely that any religion has the correct answer
ok lets see the equations for this
and then show me the equations for "nothing" creating everything being more statistically likely
or maybe you just used that word to sound smart
>>7869698
whats the number like when you take black people from the statistics
how the hell does france still have 1800 firearm deaths per year with all those gun free zones?
wait a minute, why are you calling them "deaths" in the greentext and not murders? oh thats right, because you counted all the suicides and accidental deaths to try and count them as homicides, as evidenced by your "firearms MURDERS" part of your post
lastly DGU in america is in the millions, a advocate for less guns is an advocate for more rape
>>7870302
>and then show me the equations for "nothing" creating everything being more statistically likely
First prove that there was ever "nothing" in the first place.
Pleb tier.
>>7870302
>ok lets see the equations for this
Challenge accepted!
P(G|E) * N
Where:
P = Probability
G = God exists
E = Evidence
N = Number of different gods
(est. 28,000,000 according to http://atheism.wikia.com/wiki/How_many_gods%3F)
Since E will always be 0, N becomes irrelevant.
As you can tell P will be closer to 0 than anything else.
Unless you can find some value higher than 0 for E not based on speculation but empirical data.
Have fun debunking that shit.
>>7870372
Not him, but you're hopelessly confused. E is an event, not a probability of an event or its measure within a sample space. And what are you asserting your expression equals? You seem to be trying to say number of possible gods decreases the chance of a given one to be right, but you're not. You also cannot assume that each god has an equal and independent probability, because that neglects polytheism and, say, a bizarre ecclectic mix of the Norse and Greek pantheons with deified pre-1600 catholic saints. So something like a power set would be more appropriate, provided your setup wasn't hilariously DoA.
>>7870302
>"nothing" creating everything
What is "nothing"? Have you ever observed it? What are its properties?
You have to concede that religion has been a thing in every human society since the dawn of civilization. Is it not reasonable to at least accept there may be influences underpinning yours that are not "this is the one self-evidently, truly correct faith"?
>>7870316
The US number is about 60% suicides.
>>7864635
>Good guys
>Bad guys
Jesus. Your a God damned fool.
>>7864455
u got the wrong board m8
retard board is this way: >>>/pol/
as the adolescents brain matures its nature to stray away from common beliefs or to challenge ones own knowledge or belief systems; its all personality type which CAN be challeged to a higher IQ but really its all chemicals nothing to do with intelligence this is simple psychology
