[Big Booger]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...od/3518221.stm

An ABC news poll, done in February 2004, found that approximately 60% of Americans believe that the Genesis creation account, Noah's ark and a global flood, and Moses' parting of the Red Sea are "literally true."

Belief in the literal veracity of these biblical accounts was highest among the fastest growing segment of American faith, evangelical Protestantism (nearly 90% acceptance)

According to an ICM poll in January 2004, Americans believe in the supernatural (91%), an afterlife (74%), "belief in a God/higher power makes you a better human being" (82%), God or a higher power judged their actions (76%), and perhaps most tellingly "would die for their God/beliefs" (71%).

When 71% of Americans say they would die for their faith, they are pledging allegiance to a loyalty beyond their loyalty to their country and are saying the exact polar opposite of "my country, right or wrong."

[ThinkInsane]

And this is political how?

[Big Booger]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
And this is political how?

Read the article.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by Big Booger:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programme...od/3518221.stm

An ABC news poll, done in February 2004, found that approximately 60% of Americans believe that the Genesis creation account, Noah's ark and a global flood, and Moses' parting of the Red Sea are "literally true."

Belief in the literal veracity of these biblical accounts was highest among the fastest growing segment of American faith, evangelical Protestantism (nearly 90% acceptance)

According to an ICM poll in January 2004, Americans believe in the supernatural (91%), an afterlife (74%), "belief in a God/higher power makes you a better human being" (82%), God or a higher power judged their actions (76%), and perhaps most tellingly "would die for their God/beliefs" (71%).

When 71% of Americans say they would die for their faith, they are pledging allegiance to a loyalty beyond their loyalty to their country and are saying the exact polar opposite of "my country, right or wrong."

You are quoting a BBC story about an American Poll in America? Funny.

Can you prove that it never happened? Why have so many sought out Noah's Ark?
All those "In Search Of" programs a waste of time?

Just because you have a problem with Catholicism, and the Bible, doesn't make this the forum for you to preach from. What is wrong for dying for what you believe in? Is it maybe because you don't believe in anything? That must really bother you.

91% believe in an afterlife, I guess they can't all be wrong. I recall someone mentioning a popularity poll about a movie "Passion" and how it is declining. I guess that poll makes sense but these don't? I just love how some people use polling information to get their points accross.

You just love stirring up the sh*t don't you? It is your belief I think...your only belief.
Well, it's Ash Wednesday, and I'm off to get my ashes and then see that movie...

[entrox]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
And this is political how?

Oh, it gets political very fast if you read the entire article and not only the quoted part (which misses the juicy bits).

In 1880 Dostoyevsky wrote in The Brothers Karamazov that "If God does not exist, then everything is permissible."

The history of his native Russia, wracked by the atrocities of atheistic communism for most of the 20th century, serves as a most graphic example of the truth of his conclusion.

Nazism, above all detested religion because it called for allegiance to something greater than the state, namely God.

Communism? Nazism? Sounds like politics to me. They even get the lying-part of politics right, because Nazis were all but atheist. Just look at an actual Nazi emblem!



Hint: "Gott Mit Uns" = "God With Us".

This whole article is a huge flamebait.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by entrox:
Oh, it gets political very fast if you read the entire article and not only the quoted part (which misses the juicy bits).




Communism? Nazism? Sounds like politics to me. They even get the lying-part of politics right, because Nazis were all but atheist. Just look at an actual Nazi emblem!



Hint: "Gott Mit Uns" = "God With Us".

This whole article is a huge flamebait.

And isn't the schwastika (sp) a religious symbol turned on it's side? Eastern.
Anyway, this whole article is more religious than political, and many very bad people have used religion to walk over people in God's name. It doesn't mean the religion is bad, just the people. To prosecute a religion because of historical unbalanced people, is a horrible thing to do.

The article is flamebait, as is the one who started this thread. Just look at any of his posts and you will see, he either invites argument or begins them.

[Big Booger]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:

Can you prove that it never happened? Why have so many sought out Noah's Ark?
All those "In Search Of" programs a waste of time?

Yes. It's a story that the whole world has a version of.

[Big Booger]

Originally posted by entrox:

Communism? Nazism? Sounds like politics to me. They even get the lying-part of politics right, because Nazis were all but atheist. Just look at an actual Nazi emblem!



Hint: "Gott Mit Uns" = "God With Us".

This whole article is a huge flamebait.

A baptist minister wrote it. Don't expect it to be full of facts. Just stuff that makes him feel good.

[finboy]

Originally posted by Big Booger:

An ABC news poll, done in February 2004, found that approximately 60% of Americans believe that the Genesis creation account, Noah's ark and a global flood, and Moses' parting of the Red Sea are "literally true."

Belief in the literal veracity of these biblical accounts was highest among the fastest growing segment of American faith, evangelical Protestantism (nearly 90% acceptance)

According to an ICM poll in January 2004, Americans believe in the supernatural (91%), an afterlife (74%), "belief in a God/higher power makes you a better human being" (82%), God or a higher power judged their actions (76%), and perhaps most tellingly "would die for their God/beliefs" (71%).

When 71% of Americans say they would die for their faith, they are pledging allegiance to a loyalty beyond their loyalty to their country and are saying the exact polar opposite of "my country, right or wrong."

I think folks just don't know what "literally true" means. That would contribute to some of it.

I think we need to measure the number of folks who believe in Wicca, crystals, and other fads and count their numbers when discussing the fall of mankind. People are simply ignorant of cause and effect, and the New Age movement reflects that. Measures that ask about Christianity and willingness to die for one's faith haven't changed that much over time, but the lack of scientific understanding has been growing exponentially in the past 20 years.

And last I checked, the willingness to die for one's faith was a virtue in the Palestinian community and in Al Queda, at least as reported by the international press and peaceniks. I guess the meaning of the term "freedom fighter" changes every couple of days.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by entrox:
Oh, it gets political very fast if you read the entire article and not only the quoted part (which misses the juicy bits).

I didn't read the entire article, as the quoted part implied that it was yet another topic on something that has been beaten to death here. Frankly, the whole thing is getting rather boring, and I'm tired of reading the same thing over and over. Believe what you want, let others believe what they want, live and let live. It's really that simple. I don't want o see the religious flamefest flare up again.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by finboy:
I think folks just don't know what "literally true" means. That would contribute to some of it.

That was my first thought, too, after that thread over in the Lounge on how Lindows "literally bites".

So maybe not "that stupid", but "that ignorant"? That would cover both bases...

-s*

[djohnson]

If something gives you hope in the world full of hatred, why not believe? I 100% beleive that the Bible is the truth. You cannot believe part of it without believing all of it. I can see this thread turning into a huge flame war! I am glad there are some people that support my beliefs.

[djohnson]

Ok, now why are you saying we are stupid? Just because most Americans believe in God? That is what this country was founded on!!! Were our fore fathers not Christian? This country has become the leading country in the world because we followed God. Notice that once they disallowed God in schools people started to bring guns and shoot each other? If America continues to fall away from God, then this country will be destroyed.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by djohnson:
Ok, now why are you saying we are stupid? Just because most Americans believe in God? That is what this country was founded on!!! Were our fore fathers not Christian? This country has become the leading country in the world because we followed God. Notice that once they disallowed God in schools people started to bring guns and shoot each other? If America continues to fall away from God, then this country will be destroyed.

No. He seems to be saying that people who believe in that the allegory of the creation in Genesis is literal are stupid.

Billions of people believe in God, but don't believe that Genesis is literal.

[djohnson]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
No. He seems to be saying that people who believe in that the allegory of the creation in Genesis is literal are stupid.

Billions of people believe in God, but don't believe that Genesis is literal.

Well then, I will say that when you die you find out that those who believe the literal translation were right after all. Then of course you wont like the outcome that you will get...

[ghost_flash]

I know this is a bit off topic, but not quite:

I was watching Johny Depp being interviewed and one question asked was:

What would you expect God to say if he saw you at the Pearly Gates? (paraphrase).

Response: "Wow".

I thougth that was funny. I don't care about the man's politics, or that he lives in France. He's won me over with that invterview.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by djohnson:
Well then, I will say that when you die you find out that those who believe the literal translation were right after all. Then of course you wont like the outcome that you will get...

So if you believe in evolution then you go to hell?

[Earth Mk. II]

I'm curious about how the poll questions were actually phrased... and wtf is this dividing between "Protestant (White Evangelical)," "Protestant (Liberal)," and "Protestant (African-American)?"

They seem like pretty arbitrary distinctions to throw out there.

Originally posted by djohnson:
Well then, I will say that when you die you find out that those who believe the literal translation were right after all. Then of course you wont like the outcome that you will get...

How did this further the conversation or help discourse in any way?

[djohnson]

Originally posted by BRussell:
So if you believe in evolution then you go to hell?

I never said that nor do I believe that to be true.

[djohnson]

Originally posted by Earth Mk. II:
I'm curious about how the poll questions were actually phrased... and wtf is this dividing between "Protestant (White Evangelical)," "Protestant (Liberal)," and "Protestant (African-American)?"

They seem like pretty arbitrary distinctions to throw out there.

How did this further the conversation or help discourse in any way?

It probably didnt, my bad.

Here is something to further the conversation: What about other countries. Anyone find any polls on this for anything other than America?

[fizzlemynizzle]

I was just gonna say that I bet you'll find those percentages are higher pretty much everywhere else in the world. I'd be willing to bet in Europe and Asia the beliefs run much deeper due to their histories.

No comment on whether or not that constitutes stupdiity.

[Big Booger]

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0323689/

[BRussell]

Originally posted by djohnson:
I never said that nor do I believe that to be true.

What did you mean then? thunderous said many people don't believe the creation story in genesis is literal. Then you said if you don't believe in the literal meaning, you won't like the outcome when you die. I don't think I'm being picky here, but how else could that be interpreted?

[3gg3]

Originally posted by Earth Mk. II:
I How did this further the conversation or help discourse in any way?

Well, I think it establishes pretty firmly djohnson's context for his contributions to the thread.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by fizzlemynizzle:
I was just gonna say that I bet you'll find those percentages are higher pretty much everywhere else in the world. I'd be willing to bet in Europe and Asia the beliefs run much deeper due to their histories.

Absolutely wrong. Other industrialized countries do not have the religious beliefs that the US does. We are in the same category as under-developed countries when it comes to religious beliefs. Gotta run now, I'll post a link later if you wish.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally posted by BRussell:
Absolutely wrong. Other industrialized countries do not have the religious beliefs that the US does. We are in the same category as under-developed countries when it comes to religious beliefs. Gotta run now, I'll post a link later if you wish.

Bullsh!t, if thesame poll was conducted in a grouping of industrialized countries with the probably ambiguous language this poll was written in I bet you'd come up with similar numbers. The intentions of the source of the poll mean everything and it sounds like the group that conducted this wanted to have this kind of leading results.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Big Booger:
[url]... approximately 60% of Americans believe that the Genesis creation account, Noah's ark and a global flood, and Moses' parting of the Red Sea are "literally true." ...

This is not so surprising when the same poll found for 60% of Americans religion is "very important" in their lives. If their believe in the Bible, then they will believe that the events accounted in the Bible are literally true.

[Big Booger]

Originally posted by Captain Obvious:
Bullsh!t, if thesame poll was conducted in a grouping of industrialized countries with the probably ambiguous language this poll was written in I bet you'd come up with similar numbers.

I doubt it. Canada and the UK are mentioned in the article. They had far lower figures. They also have less cultural violence, deaths by shooting, racism, etc

I think this God and gun thing is disturbing. And dying for a religion...is there really a fight against terrorism or a crusade masked as something else?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
[B]... All those "In Search Of" programs a waste of time ...?/B]

Yes.

If the Christian god exists, then there will be no evidence of it's existence ... evidence of it's existence would defeat the purpose of belief based on faith alone.

If the Christian god does not exist, then neither will Noah's Ark.

In either case, searching for Noah's Ark is a waste of time.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally posted by Big Booger:
I doubt it.

I'm sure you do, its your thread.
If you thought it was flawed I am sure you would not have posted it.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Captain Obvious:
Bullsh!t, if thesame poll was conducted in a grouping of industrialized countries with the probably ambiguous language this poll was written in I bet you'd come up with similar numbers. The intentions of the source of the poll mean everything and it sounds like the group that conducted this wanted to have this kind of leading results.

I wasn't referring to the article presented in this thread. I didn't even read it. There have been many international studies of religiosity, and they all show the US way up there with the developing countries in religiosity. Here's one example. Just to pull a couple numbers off the page:

Belief in God:
US: 63%
Israel: 43%
Great Britain: 24%
Norway: 20%

Belief in evolution:
US: 35%
Israel: 57%
GB: 77%
Norway: 65%

I saw one study that plotted religiosity against economic status, and the US was a severe outlier: the most religious country for our economic status. I couldn't find that particular graphic but I'll look again.

[Xeo]

Originally posted by djohnson:
Ok, now why are you saying we are stupid? Just because most Americans believe in God? That is what this country was founded on!!! Were our fore fathers not Christian? This country has become the leading country in the world because we followed God. Notice that once they disallowed God in schools people started to bring guns and shoot each other? If America continues to fall away from God, then this country will be destroyed.

Yes, they were not. Before you go condemning our country to certain destruction, perhaps you should read up more on your history.

The Founding Fathers Were NOT Christians
Religion and the Founding Fathers
AMERICA - Not a Christian Nation!
Notes on the Founding Fathers and the Separation of Church and State

And all these were found on the first page of this Google search. Notice I didn't even search for the word "Christian."

So if America was not founded on Biblical morals and laws, and it is the "leading country in the world," then perhaps moving away from God will only make us stronger.

[Big Booger]

Originally posted by Xeo:
Yes, they were not. Before you go condemning our country to certain destruction, perhaps you should read up more on your history.

The Founding Fathers Were NOT Christians
Religion and the Founding Fathers
AMERICA - Not a Christian Nation!
Notes on the Founding Fathers and the Separation of Church and State

And all these were found on the first page of this Google search. Notice I didn't even search for the word "Christian."

So if America was not founded on Biblical morals and laws, and it is the "leading country in the world," then perhaps moving away from God will only make us stronger.

Correct. Many of them were open minded deists, Freemasons and Enlightenment thinkers. If they saw the religious fundamentalism in east and west today they would probably introduce laws that treat organised religion like any other business and make sure they had proper accounts and paid proper taxes and also kept their noses out of politics. They'd sh!t all over Compassionate Conservatism.

[mfdynusore]

Originally posted by fizzlemynizzle:
I was just gonna say that I bet you'll find those percentages are higher pretty much everywhere else in the world. I'd be willing to bet in Europe and Asia the beliefs run much deeper due to their histories.

No comment on whether or not that constitutes stupdiity.

Recently I read that Europe is much less "religious" than the US. Note the French position on religious displays in schools.

[Captain Obvious]

Two international surveys were conducted during 1991 and 1993 by the International Social Survey Program (ISSP). This is currently located at the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago._

Seven questions were asked in 1991:

God: "I know God exists and I have no doubts about it"
Afterlife: I definitely believe in "life after death"
Bible: "The Bible is the actual word of God and it is to be taken literally, word for word."_A yes answer implies that the subject believes in the inerrancy of the Bible.
Devil: I definitely believe in "the Devil."
Hell: I definitely believe in "Hell."
Heaven: I definitely believe in "Heaven."
Miracle: I definitely believe in "religious miracles."

It doesn't seem to give much leeway to the degrees of belief among the general population.
Yes or no answers aren't very realistic to detect how people feel about any issue that can have varying degrees of importance in their lives. Plus who the hell is the Ontario consultants on religious tolerance? Apparently they are not only fans of Hans Kung but also Dr Phil.

I don't doubt there are a large percentage of religious people in America but the degree with which that religious conviction exists is different then what you two are trying to paint to suppot your views.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Big Booger:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0323689/

I wonder who His agent is

[Big Booger]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I wonder who His agent is

ICM

(I see him)

[Logic]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I wonder who His agent is

Gabriel something

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by djohnson:
If something gives you hope in the world full of hatred, why not believe? I 100% beleive that the Bible is the truth. You cannot believe part of it without believing all of it.

I agree.

I have been wondering, though: I regularly need to burn my female slaves' bedclothes, after I allow them to leave their room again when their periods are over.

How do I get them off the bed without becoming unclean myself?

Have you found a workable solution to this problem?

-s*

[vmarks]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
I agree.

I have been wondering, though: I regularly need to burn my female slaves' bedclothes, after I allow them to leave their room again when their periods are over.

How do I get them off the bed without becoming unclean myself?

Have you found a workable solution to this problem?

-s*

Keep reading, you should come across a handy section on ritual baths.

(Smarmy questions deserve answers in kind. No where in the bible does it suggest that it is your duty to take on female slaves. But, hey, whatever makes you happy... )

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by vmarks:
(Smarmy questions deserve answers in kind. No where in the bible does it suggest that it is your duty to take on female slaves. But, hey, whatever makes you happy... )

Not my *duty* to take them on.

But my right.

-s*

[theolein]

Originally posted by djohnson:
If something gives you hope in the world full of hatred, why not believe? I 100% beleive that the Bible is the truth. You cannot believe part of it without believing all of it. I can see this thread turning into a huge flame war! I am glad there are some people that support my beliefs.

This is the second time I've seen you write that you're glad that people support your beliefs. Do you think that if you repeat it often enough before anyone even has time to posts anything that it will come true?

[gadster]

It would appear that the answer is:

yes.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by vmarks:
(Smarmy questions deserve answers in kind. No where in the bible does it suggest that it is your duty to take on female slaves. But, hey, whatever makes you happy... )

And it is most certainly my "duty" to avoid contact with menstruating women, and to burn a bunch of stuff they come into contact with.

At least, it sounds pretty damn imperative in Deuteronomy.

But heck, who am I to judge what "literal" means...right?

-s*

[eklipse]

It doesn't really matter what anyone believes, as long as their 'beliefs' don't lead them to harm others.

[Big Booger]

There's a poll on the BBC News front page about globaL religiosity. The UK seems to be the most rational country in every question asked. Meanwhile the USA is down there with fricking Nigeria, a ravaged third world country.
I hope we don't become a theocracy. What's Bush going to ban next?

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by djohnson:
Well then, I will say that when you die you find out that those who believe the literal translation were right after all. Then of course you wont like the outcome that you will get...

What a load of bunk! Nice veiled threat there... very "Christian" of you. The Torah IS NOT TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY. Want a truly expert opinion? Ask a Rabbi... after all, it's their book.

Sure, take the NT literally, *I do, just remember the reality of what the OT truly is. It's a collection of books, by 2 authors (Jeremiah and Ezra), to heighten the identity of Israel and establish their priniciple dogma. All in all, not a bad thing, and for it's time it did it's job. They borrowed from many other legends and condensed many events into a more tasteful story... sprinkling in some out-and-out fabrication for the sake of dramatic license. Most scholars of the Tanakh will tell you that the authors' goal was to provide a sound mythology incorporated with powerful folklore. Make no mistake, it was a great success.

However, the main fault of the Fundamentalist Right is their embracing of the OT, which denotes wrath and retribution for people's faults, a doctrine which may work well with shepherds and ancient tribesmen, but holds little value today except in the broadest sense. As I said, the OT is folklore. Yeah, some is true, but that doesn't make it ALL true.

Listen well, embrace the NT, it denotes and expands on the good things of the OT while abandoning the fruitless pursuit of blood, vengence, and control (except Paul, and I have my own issues with him). Jesus didn't die to promote 1000s of years of violence, but to end it. It's all about free will.



*except, for the Revelations of John the Essene, a purely Gnostic work written almost completely in "Sod".

[nonhuman]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
What a load of bunk! Nice veiled threat there... very "Christian" of you. The Torah IS NOT TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY. Want a truly expert opinion? Ask a Rabbi... after all, it's their book.

Sure, take the NT literally, *I do, just remember the reality of what the OT truly is. It's a collection of books, by 2 authors (Jeremiah and Ezra), to heighten the identity of Israel and establish their priniciple dogma. All in all, not a bad thing, and for it's time it did it's job. They borrowed from many other legends and condensed many events into a more tasteful story... sprinkling in some out-and-out fabrication for the sake of dramatic license. Most scholars of the Tanakh will tell you that the authors' goal was to provide a sound mythology incorporated with powerful folklore. Make no mistake, it was a great success.

Great post. Except that it's impossible to take the NT as a whole literally (even without Revelations) because the four gospels don't even agree about the details of Jesus' life which is their primary focus. So we have to limit it to just the synoptic gospels. Now we're already down two books. And once we start eliminating books, we're picking and choosing what we want to believe. Why choose Matthew, Mark, and Luke, over John? Perhaps we should throw out the synoptics and stick with John. And what about the Gospel of Thomas? I have serious misgivings about Paul as well.

The Bible is just too inconsistent to be taken literally. Regardless of whether or not it's stupid to do so, it's impossible.

[djohnson]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
What a load of bunk! Nice veiled threat there... very "Christian" of you. The Torah IS NOT TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY. Want a truly expert opinion? Ask a Rabbi... after all, it's their book.

Sure, take the NT literally, *I do, just remember the reality of what the OT truly is. It's a collection of books, by 2 authors (Jeremiah and Ezra), to heighten the identity of Israel and establish their priniciple dogma. All in all, not a bad thing, and for it's time it did it's job. They borrowed from many other legends and condensed many events into a more tasteful story... sprinkling in some out-and-out fabrication for the sake of dramatic license. Most scholars of the Tanakh will tell you that the authors' goal was to provide a sound mythology incorporated with powerful folklore. Make no mistake, it was a great success.

However, the main fault of the Fundamentalist Right is their embracing of the OT, which denotes wrath and retribution for people's faults, a doctrine which may work well with shepherds and ancient tribesmen, but holds little value today except in the broadest sense. As I said, the OT is folklore. Yeah, some is true, but that doesn't make it ALL true.

Listen well, embrace the NT, it denotes and expands on the good things of the OT while abandoning the fruitless pursuit of blood, vengence, and control (except Paul, and I have my own issues with him). Jesus didn't die to promote 1000s of years of violence, but to end it. It's all about free will.

*except, for the Revelations of John the Essene, a purely Gnostic work written almost completely in "Sod".

You talk about free will but then bash when I say something? Is it not my "free will" that I can write what I want? Sure maybe what I said was taken a little to far. But to come back and throw back in my face is taking it way beyond to far.

You speak that the OT was written by 2 authors... Where do you find this? In the OT itself and the NT, there are many places where people refer to the authors of the books and guess what, its not Jeremiah and Ezra! Maybe you should do some research before you speak.

Here is one thing that I have noticed. Those that tend to flock these boards tend to be liberal. Is this a bad thing? Nope because noone can control what you think. My beliefs will not change based on stuff said by people on here. My beliefs come from personal experiences.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by nonhuman:


Great post. Except that it's impossible to take the NT as a whole literally (even without Revelations) because the four gospels don't even agree about the details of Jesus' life which is their primary focus. So we have to limit it to just the synoptic gospels. Now we're already down two books. And once we start eliminating books, we're picking and choosing what we want to believe. Why choose Matthew, Mark, and Luke, over John? Perhaps we should throw out the synoptics and stick with John. And what about the Gospel of Thomas? I have serious misgivings about Paul as well.

The Bible is just too inconsistent to be taken literally. Regardless of whether or not it's stupid to do so, it's impossible.

I'm partial to Mark, being the first. I will make a revision here, taking something literally doesn't mean accepting everything that's said.