I don't understand how you can assume that because someone is Christian they are unintelligent and only believe because they grew up in a religious family. I didn't go to church but maybe 5 times my entire childhood. I didn't become Christian until I was twenty one, while attending college. I also believe that I am a fairly well educated individual. As was mentioned in the article academia is not entirely atheist as you may presume. At my school, Georgia Tech, you find professors of physics, math, cs, and just about every other that believe in a higher power. They most likely subscribe to all different kinds of beliefs and views but thats not the point. The point is that they are highly educated individuals, yet they still believe in a God. Being educated does not make someone atheist. Some people just agree with that reasoning more than others. Its all a matter of what makes sense to you. Why does this offend you so much?
i would be surprised even in georgia if many physics professors believe in biblegod as described in the bible. lets try this another way. what makes sense to you as a college educated person? when you read in the bible that god made women by taking a rib from adam while he slept do you believe it?
Being Christian doesn't automatically mean that you take every single word in the bible to be the unquestionable truth of God. Being Christian means that you have accepted God into your life and are committed to finding answers. That is what I have done. When I was younger I was never able to have faith as you would call it. I started off thinking I was too intelligent to believe in some sort of metaphysical answer to life. But that was my bias and mistake. The longer I was in school the more I couldn't help but lose faith in my belief that God didn't exist. IMO all of the evidence and knowledge that I was gaining was against this idea. It was at this point that I started to heavily investigate and question my beliefs. I blended philosophical, scientific, and religious concepts to discover what I believe to be the best answer I can come up with. I never stop asking questions and I don't shy away from things that conflict with my views. IMO when we stop learning and growing as individuals we lose what makes us human. All I'm asking is that you don't immediately judge someone because they are Christian. Let a man stand on his own merits.
ok in a long winded way you conceded that you cant accept the bible story of how a woman was created in the bible. lets try another one. as a college educated man when you read in the bible that a giant fish swallowed a man and 3 days later spit him out unharmed what do you think? do you believe a man can survive in the stomach of a fish for 3 days unharmed? a simple yes or no will surfice.
Again I don't understand why you assume all Christians interpret the Bible literally. In Jesus' time all of the religious leaders were heavily educated in philosophy. Is it not rational to assume that some of their writings might be symbolic and philosophic in nature instead of literal. It would appear to me that you haven't given the topic much thought.
Education correlates well with atheism. Atheism is very uncommon amongst those with no formal education, and pretty common amongst Nobel prize winners, for example. The answer to the question then is that religion still exists because there are still large numbers of uneducated people in the world.
ok one more and we can get to the point. when you read in the bible a man built a huge boat and summoned 2 of each species of animal to come to the boat. then animals of every species from around the world made the treck to the boat. that would include animals like Marsupials that can not swim and that are only found in an island many thousands of miles from the middle east. thinking about that story as an educated man do you think that story is factual?
As the article stated, belief in a higher power is still common among highly educated researchers and academics. Thus, contrary to your assertion religion is not merely a disease of the uneducated. Furthermore, this debate was not about proving if sections of the bible are true or not. We were questioning the existence of a higher power. I have openly stated several times that I don't read the bible as a literal document. I am, however, very confident in the existence of God. They are mutually exclusive events. I hope in the future you will find a way to overcome your bias and truly explore this subject. You're constant focus is on finding flaws in what you consider to be "Christianity", more specifically only the bible. As Descartes would say, the bible will only convince people of absolute faith. I admittedly am not in that category. For those of us who do not have that ability we must look for the answers elsewhere. A good place to start is with the greatest gift God gave us, reason. But in order to truly evaluate the question you must first rid yourself of bias. I know from personal experience this can be a difficult task. We men are very arrogant, it is our biggest flaw. That is all I have for you now. If you have a different question or would like to talk further you can PM me. I would gladly give you an insight into what I believe and why. People criticizing me for my beliefs does not bother me. I will continue to question the world around me and look for answers to the big questions. I hope you have a great evening. Regards, Bryan
the way you use reason is to use your ability to think to evaluate what you are told. i dont know your age but i suspect i have spent more time thinking about this than you have been alive. ok. we have both agreed that the three major stories in the bible that we talked about are not factual. here is the question we have to consider now. in the bible there is a story about a man called Jesus who was killed. in that story 3 days after the was killed he got up and started walking around. then later he flew up into the clouds promising to return someday. as a college educated man can you think of any way that a man dead for 3 days could come back to life? since we have already concluded that 3 of the four stories we talked about are not factual how do we conclude that the fourth story about a dead man coming back to life is factual? what basis do we have to think any of the bible stories are factual?