The delusion of believers.

Image

angus

Advertisements

107 thoughts on “The delusion of believers.

  1. Laat my dink aan die fliek Elmer Gantry waar Gantry opkyk na die hemel en vra (terwyl die skare hom toe kyk): “God, do you hate them?” (dis nou die skare wat wil weet) Sonder dat mens nou ‘n antwoord hoor, sê Gantry vir die skare: “No, God does not hate you.”

    Elke godbot dink sy gode praat met hom/haar maar ons weet dis maar net die koppe wat raas.

    Like

    • Michelle, luister eerder na “Imagine” van John Lennon. Musikaal en lirieke in ‘n ander klas as die produk vd outjies wat jy hierbo pos. Wat mens laat dink: Hoekom het die gotte vir ou John met soveel talent geseen terwyl die javels hierbo (wat skynbaar die gotte dien) maar skraps bedeeld is. Klink vir my na ‘n bad deal Michele.

      Like

    • Bible-bangers aren’t the brightest, study shows

      The more religious you are, the less likely you are to be intelligent, a new scientific study has found.

      According to researchers, Christians – particularly fundamentalists who believe the Bible is God’s word – have a lower IQ than those who are less religious.

      A possible reason behind the finding was a tendency for more intelligent people to challenge religious claims, said one of the researchers, New Zealand psychologist Professor Tim Bates.

      “If you believe in religion, you haven’t really questioned things,” he said. “Brighter people were less likely to feel that religion plays a dominant role in their life.”

      To reach the conclusion, researchers from the University of Edinburgh compared the results of responses from 2300 adults with varying levels of religious belief. They rated themselves on a scale of one to five in response to a range of statements about their spirituality, religious identification, practices, support, mindfulness and fundamentalism.

      Statements and questions included: “The Bible is the actual word of God”; “I feel God is punishing me for my sins or lack of spirituality”; and “How often do you pray in private?”

      To measure intelligence, researchers carried out tests on recall, memory, verbal fluency, processing and reasoning. For example, participants were asked to recall a series of digits backwards and recite a list of words after a delay.

      The researchers found higher IQ scores were significantly associated with lower scores on five of the six measures of religiosity – all except spirituality.

      The strongest result was in the area of fundamental beliefs.

      Intelligence was an “inoculation against fundamentalism”, with each 15-point increase in IQ making people about half as likely to have strong fundamentalist views, said Bates.

      “People who claim The Bible is the literal word of God are typically less likely to be intelligent,” said fellow researcher Gary Lewis.

      He and Bates agreed that those with higher IQs were more likely to challenge the claims made by religion.

      The finding was a “fairly bold statement” to make, said University of Auckland Professor of theology, Elaine Wainwright.

      She agreed fundamentalists were less likely to challenge religious beliefs, but questioned whether this was related to intelligence.

      Intelligent people helped to progress religion in new directions, she said.

      The study also found that women were more religious than men and those who rated high in openness were less fundamental but more spiritual.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10750898

      Like

  2. Hierdie boek gaan die godbots lelik omkrap. Maar ek is seker die wetenskaplike feite gaan hulle nie van koers bring op hulle tog van illusies en irrasionaliteit nie.

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-atheism-helped-create-the-modern-world-excerpt/

    “It is certainly a clear gain to astronomical science, that the church which tried to compel Galileo to unsay the truth has been overborne by the growing unbelief of the age, even though our little children are yet taught that Joshua made the sun . . . stand still.”
    (Charles Bradlaugh)

    Maar ons moet tot vandag toe veg dat die skole nie hierdie nonsense aan ons kinders verkondig nie.

    Like

  3. Yes, McBrolloks, the godbots have unconvincing arguments to discredit rational thinkers.

    “Knowing God helps them live and legislate in the “right” way, they say. (These are the US political godbots.)

    “But vocal atheists reinforce this binary of Godly vs. godless, too—the argument is just not as obvious. Theirs is a subtle assertion: Believers aren’t educated or thoughtful enough to debunk God, and if they only knew more, rational evidence would surely offset faith.”

    The last sentence is the crux of the atheists’ argument. Rational evidence shows that the godbots’ heads are playing these funny tunes creating a non-existent god for them. And these tunes differ in pitch and sound. Some even “see” 3 gods that are actually one if you just slant the mirror the right angle. What a terrible way to spend the one life you have!

    Like

    • Yep Savage. Talking about legislate. I wonder if the current law proposed in Mozambique regarding rape, may serve about an example of good legislation using the Bible as moral compass( see my post below on this topic).

      Like

  4. Indien daar enige onsekerheid bestaan oor die potensiële gevaar wat dogmatiese gottediens inhou….. Hierdie wetgewing bestaan reeds in Morocco, waar verkragters enige straf vrygeskeld word indien hulle met hul slagoffer trou. Waar het hierdie gekkigheid sy oorsprong? Reg geraai – Die Bybel (en Koran).

    Deuteronomy 22:28-29 New International Version (NIV) : “28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”
    —————————————–
    http://blog.amnestyusa.org/africa/happening-now-mozambique-debating-rape-marriage-legislation
    HAPPENING NOW: Mozambique Debating Rape-Marriage Legislation

    By Sarah Hager
    March 18, 2014 at 2:30 PM


    This month, Mozambique’s Parliament debates proposed revisions to Article 223 of the country’s Criminal Code which would allow rapists to escape punishment if they marry the survivor of the rape (Photo Credit: AFP/GettyImages).
    Imagine if you reported a rape, only to discover the law is on the side of your rapist.
    A couple months ago, we shared the story of Amina Filali, a 16-year-old girl in Morocco who was forced to marry the man who raped her. Months after being married, Amina committed suicide by swallowing rat poison. Amina’s death caused an outcry in Morocco and throughout the region.
    In January, nearly two years after Amina’s death, the widely-criticized clause in Morocco’s Penal Code sanctioning the marriage was finally abolished.
    But elsewhere in Africa, the struggle is far from over.

    If this legislation passes, instead of being offered support, survivors of sexual violence in Mozambique may find that, like Amina, the force of law will determine they have nowhere to turn for help.

    This month, Mozambique’s Parliament debates proposed revisions to Article 223 of the country’s Criminal Code which would allow rapists to escape punishment if they marry the survivor of the rape.
    This practice is not uncommon under traditional customs, particularly in rural areas. Laws and practices such are designed to defend the honor of the family, no matter the cost to the survivor.
    Additionally, the proposed law incorporates prior Articles regarding rape of minors, allowing rapists to escape prosecution through marriage to young girls, effectively allowing child marriages. The law in Mozambique currently prohibits entirely marriage of girls under the age of 16, and only with parental consent for girls between 16 and 18. Amnesty is concerned these proposed revisions appear to deprive minor children under 18 of special protections of the law due to them by virtue of their age.
    If this legislation passes, instead of being offered support, survivors of sexual violence in Mozambique may find that, like Amina, the force of law will determine they have nowhere to turn for help.
    We cannot let women and girls find themselves in such desperate situations. We need to stand with the women and girls of Mozambique. And we can start by demanding that proposed Article 223 not be passed.

    Like

  5. While in South Africa women get grants for fucking.

    New pregnancy grant

    Extending the child support grant to pregnant mothers could help reduce South Africa’s “astonishingly high” maternal mortality rate.

    This is according to research by Wits University health economist Professor Alex van den Heever, commissioned by the Department of Social Development.

    Van den Heever will present his findings to the Treasury.

    Chile, which has an economy of about the same size as South Africas, has 24 maternal deaths per 100 000 women. But in South Africa between 300 and 400 women per 100000 die from pregnancy-related causes, Van den Heever told doctors at the Wits Centre for Health Policy’s summit on maternal deaths on Friday.

    One of the biggest causes of this sky-high maternal mortality rate is that many women present themselves for antenatal care too late in their pregnancy.

    Some arrive at hospital for the first time when they are already in labour. This often makes it impossible for doctors to deal with complications in time.

    Van den Heever said women knew that they should go to a clinic for a check-up but often could not afford the bus or taxi fare.

    “We need to protect pregnant women’s access to employment and offer them generalised income support,” he said.

    Transport costs and the loss of pay for leaving work for a day discouraged women from seeking medical treatment.

    Research at the Rahima Moosa Mother and Child Hospital by Youth Lab sociologist Tessa Doorns found that pregnancies made poor women feel “helpless”.

    “Most pregnancies are unplanned,” she told the summit.

    Van den Heever said maternal deaths led to “long-term systematic problems in a country’s development”.

    Malnourishment of the foetuses and infants led to irreversible damage to the child,” he said.

    “Poor brain development cannot be reversed through education or eating well later in life.”

    Doorns said the pregnant women she interviewed said they knew they should have a balanced diet but could not afford it.

    The extension of the child support grant to pregnant women could be structured so that they were compelled to get antenatal care, said Van den Heever.

    Like

  6. Question: “Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist?”

    Answer: Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is often pointed to by atheists, skeptics, and other Bible attackers as evidence that the Bible is backwards, cruel, and misogynist, and therefore, not the Word of God. At first glance, this passage seems to command that a rape victim must marry her rapist. Is that the correct interpretation of the text, and if so, how is that not horribly unfair to the woman? This issue is actually addressed in two passages, both of which are below:

    Deuteronomy 22:28-29 “If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.”

    Exodus 22:16-17 “If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride price for her and make her his wife. If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride price for virgins.”

    Together, these passages clearly state that if a man has sex with a virgin who is not betrothed (regardless of whether or not it was rape or consensual) he is obliged to marry her. He should have sought her father’s permission first, negotiated a bride-price, and taken her as his wife. Because he did not, he is punished for this—he now must pay up (he can’t opt out any more) and marry her (which could be a major punishment in itself if this was a foolish, spur-of-the-moment act and she really wasn’t the right woman for him!).

    Also note that “he may not divorce her all his days” – this initially doesn’t seem significant but is actually a major punishment. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (restated more clearly in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9) allowed for divorce, but only in the case of sexual immorality (the word “uncleanness” refers to this and was translated as such in the LXX). This man now may not divorce his wife even for this reason, but is obliged to continue to support her all his life whatever she does.

    But her father is ultimately in authority over her, as her head, until he hands this authority over to her husband. If the man is unsuitable, the father can refuse to give his daughter to him. How many fathers would give their daughter to a rapist? Not many. So, in general, a rapist would actually have to pay a 50 silver shekel fine to her father, and not get a wife at all.

    The answer to the question is in Exodus 22:17 – the woman does NOT have to marry a rapist, she must only do what her father says.

    Note that throughout the Old Testament no rape victim is ever recorded as being forced to marry a rapist. However it is plausible that there could be circumstances in which a father would choose to have his daughter marry a rapist. In 2 Samuel 13, Amnon, a son of David, rapes his half-sister, Tamar. Tamar was not forced to marry Amnon. Interestingly, though, Tamar seemed to have wanted to marry Amnon after the rape (2 Samuel 13:13-16). Why would she desire such a thing? In that culture, virginity was highly prized. It would have been very difficult for a woman who was not a virgin, and especially a woman who had been raped, to find a man to marry her. It seems that Tamar would have rather married Amnon than live desolate and single the rest of her life, which is what happened to her (2 Samuel 13:20). So Deuteronomy 22:28-29 could be viewed as merciful to the woman, who, because of the rape, would be considered unmarriageable. In that culture, a woman without a husband would have a very difficult time providing for herself. Unmarried women often had no choice but to sell themselves into slavery or prostitution just to survive. This is why the passage leaves marriage to the discretion of the father, because every situation is different, and it is better to be flexible than have a blanket rule.

    Also note that the penalty for having sex with an unbetrothed virgin is completely different from the penalty for sex with a married or betrothed woman. Sex with a married or betrothed woman is adultery and was to be punished by the death of both if consensual, or the death of the man if it was rape (Deuteronomy 22:22-27).

    Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Deuteronomy-22-28-29-marry-rapist.html#ixzz2wuT1hovK

    Like

    • Michelle, eerstens skaam jou dat jy so blatant cut en paste uit ander webtuistes. Is jy te lui om vir jouself te dink?.

      Lees tog net wat jy hierbo skryf – of het jy enigsins jou antwoord gelees alvorens jy gepaste het?

      Die outeur hierbo wriemel en swoeg om te verduidelik maar maak nie hond haaraf nie. Feit bly staan: jou gotte beveel aan dat die oortreder trou met die slagoffer. Kan jy aan enigiets meer wreed as dit dink? Daar kan geen regverdiging hiervoor wees nie en die blote feit dit jy hiermee instem, bewys maar net hoe gottediens andersins goeie mense, laat instem tot absurdhede soos hierdie.

      Wees vir ‘n slag eerlik Michelle. Dink vir jouself en probeer bietjie commin sense.

      Like

      • Jissie Malherbe, maar as dit nie die perfekte voorbeel van ‘n brein wat gevrot is nie!

        Vra vir daardie zombie Michelle hoe sy tekere sal gaan as ‘n swart man in haar huis inbreek en haar dogter of haar niggie verkrag. Gaan hulle dan gou gou die dominee haal en die twee forseer om met mekaar te trou?

        Jirre jusses bat-got help my!

        Like

        • Nie eers te praat van die arme siel wat ‘n fundie se dogter eerste bykom nie, en die ouers vind uit. Hierdie mense leef so ver van hulle ideologie af en verbeel hulle self dis wat hulle spook beveel. Hulle moet glo dat hulle almal die heel tyd sonde pleeg. Gin wonder hulle is so bang vir die dood nie, want hulle weet hulle versterk hulle plek in die hel op ‘n daaglikse basis.

          Gelukkig kan hulle net gou gou ‘n gebedjie opse en hoop alles is vergewe. En as die wiele nou eers afkom, kan hulle maar die duiwel die skuld gee.

          Like

          • Ja Mac, die probleem met die Michelle van ons tyd is dat hulle nooit geleer is om te dink nie. Hulle volg bloot die pad van minste weerstand soos ‘n trop skape die afgrond af. Hulle is letterlik verlore siele.

            Like

          • “Hulle moet glo dat hulle almal die heel tyd sonde pleeg.” And by implication that everyone else is getting up to stront as well, so that’s a good enough reason to have their depressing snouts in your business. I know you don’t like me talking about my neighbours, but I am so glad I created a no contact rule. I can hear her complaining from a distance, but nothing I can make out. So that’s sorted.

            Like

          • “Nie eers te praat van die arme siel wat ‘n fundie se dogter eerste bykom nie,” Actually that happened in my little town. A self described pagan had a relationship with the daughter of the local NG Kerk’s dominee and was chased out of town. To me, he’s just a guy who likes nature.

            Like

    • To think that there are still people who believe in all this barbaric crap from over two thousand years ago. Fundies are, without exception, miserable with their verkrampte little lives and want everyone else to suffer because they can’t cut it. Or else they want a hand out because you can’t really believe this rubbish, you must have an ulterior motive pretending that you do.

      Like

    • Malherbe, so what you are actually saying is that people sharing the same opinion about the same subject and refers to it more than once does not have an opinion at all, is considered boring and not very intelligent?

      I would strongly recommend that you have a look at your posts and so many of your friends, throughout this blog, who share the same opinion about the same subject and refers to it more than once.

      We would not want to insult you now, would we? So I would really be careful what you say, and how you say it, before you start insulting others about their opinions and beliefs or how they refer to it. You just might insult your own friends to. (Which BTW I don’t think they would appreciate very much)

      If you don’t like what I have to say or how I say it, it is really simple don’t read it and don’t comment. (Dit is so maklik soos val uit ‘n boom, los net die tak Malherbe). I ignore your posts, except this one. (I just wanted to point out that you are actually not just insulting me, but everybody else that has commented on this blog about various topics over and over again) Oh and don’t forget your wonderful self.

      For people who claims they know everything about everything… well we will just leave at that.

      Like

      • “I would really be careful what you say, and how you say it, before you start insulting others about their opinions and beliefs or how they refer to it.”

        Oh boo hooooo sob *sniffle* bweeeeh

        Like

      • Michelle, most of the stuff you post here are sloppy “cut-and-paste” job from other sites. At least illustrate to us that you put some though into your point by putting forward a cogent argument.

        In essence, what you are doing is delivering a sermon using unverified and dubious sources. Believe me Michelle, in my lifetime I have listened to numerous similar gibbirish – from pulpits, from dominees, from teachers (indoctrinated by dogma), from army chaplains that had to justify an unjust war (in the name of the gotte, of course). All of them had one thing in common – they did not allow open debate on a topic.

        You remind me of the dominee’s of old, Michelle. You refuse to comment on straight forward questions. You assume that lecturing us using and quoting from your ridiculous sources, suffices as suitable answer. You are wrong. Incidentally, and as I mentioned on more than one occasion, we are quite knowledgeable on your book of fables. I can throw a hundred verses in your face that you will not be able to explain – and by the way, people far more learned than you on the bible, also dance around these verse (by own admission). You just have to delve into the writings of guys like prof Julian Muller, dr Christina Landman or prof Sakkie Spanneberg, to realise that your book of fables is a minefield open to various interpretations; and some that simply cannot be explained or justified against a 21st century ethical code.

        But I doubt that you will read my comment, Michelle, and if you do, I doubt that you will understand where I am going with this – not because you are stupid (I don’t think you are), but because your brain is muddled with years of indoctrination. You are a typical religiot that put their dogma first and then start looking around for evidence to support the crap you believe in. The dishonesty of the methodology is lost on you. Your brain is infected with a virus, not unlike those we find on computers. Sometimes we are lucky and the hard-drive can be cleaned and used, but often the computer becomes dysfunctional and of limited value for any progressive actions. So Michelle, the question is: Is their any hope in saving your hard drive from this terrible god-virus?

        Like

  7. “I just wanted to point out that you are actually not just insulting me, but everybody else that has commented on this blog about various topics over and over again)”

    Malherbe does not insult anybody. All he does is to point out when someone is using unproven facts to back up an unsound argument. He did not insult you. He just asked why you use other peoples writings to bring your opinions across. You quote from the book of fables and expect us to take you seriously. As has been asked on this blog numerous times: Bring the proof of the existence of your god(s) to us, then you at least have a premise to argue from. But you fail to do that (supply the proof) and that is why we can see you godbots are delusional.

    “For people who claims (sic) they know everything about everything… well we will just leave at that.”

    You will leave it at that because you do not have an opinion on the matter yourself. Cut and paste us an appropriate answer as you regularly do with zeal.

    Like

  8. Small fundie group meet but fail to notice each other

    ANAHEIM HILLS — A small group from Life Baptist church met during the week, but the members have no memory of seeing each other because they were staring at their smartphones the entire time.

    “I thought everyone else was keeping up the discussion,” says one woman who successfully ‘Liked’ fifty-five posts and finished two games of Words With Friends during the 90-minute gathering. “I guess no one was.”

    Members were so engrossed in texting, posting and Tweeting that it did not occur to them that nobody was talking, let alone leading the meeting. Silence descended on the room as members sat tapping screens, occasionally giggling and typing messages.

    “I went into the kitchen at one point to get snacks, and it did seem awfully quiet,” says one man. “Everyone had their heads down. I thought we were praying.”

    One man had just bought a new app and was eager to try it out.

    “I was tearing it up on Tiny Wings and thought everyone would understand,” he says. “I remember walking into a door, but I’m not sure what building it was — maybe small group or Bed, Bath and Beyond. I don’t have a visual for it anymore.”

    Some people even texted and messaged each other while in the same room.

    “I was having a great conversation with Karen on Facebook and didn’t notice that she was sitting three feet away from me,” says one woman. “She messaged me, ‘Oh, I’m in small group,’ and I messaged her back, ‘Really? Me too!’”

    Only later did members confirm that a meeting had taken place by piecing together tweets, texts and Facebook posts.

    “It says on Facebook that I checked in at their house, so I must have been there,” says one woman. “Facebook doesn’t lie.”

    Others looked at their timelines and Twitter feeds and saw posts like “Heading to small group” and “Picking up chips and salsa” at around the same time. But none have any memory of what happened after that.

    “I think I ate a plate of something, but I was pretty engrossed in Fruit Ninja, so I didn’t really notice,” says one man. “It may have been brownie bites.”

    One woman and her husband arrived home afterward, sat in their garage, looked at each other and said, “Did we just go to small group?”

    “It was a little eerie,” says the wife. “The only thing I can recall is seeing my iPhone screen. Which, by the way, have you checked out this app?”

    Members group-texted each other afterward and pledged to actually look at each other next time they meet.

    “We felt kind of bad,” says one man. “I told them if I forget to pay attention next time, just Facetime me.”

    http://www.larknews.com/archives/4193

    Like

  9. Michelle,
    I won’t insult you. But…..

    I can insult anything that does not exist, can’t I? So here goes…..

    Michelle, jou got is ‘n poes….. Jou jesus is ‘n poes …… Al jou engele is poese…….

    Daar het jy dit.

    O ja, amper vergeet. Jou duiwel is ook ‘n poes. Ek weet hiermee sal jy saam stem,
    ne?

    Al wat my pla, is die feit dat ‘n poes ‘n lekker ding is. Ons moet tog ‘n ander woord

    kry om die gotte en jesusse te beskryf. (lol)

    Like

  10. I see that ancient coffin-dodger Angus Buchan is going back to the USA in May to fleece the sheeples there again. Not enough fuckwits in South Africa to keep him in the style he’s become accustomed to.

    Like

  11. Michelle, daar is niks nuut onder die son nie, jy het nou jou pêrels voor die varke gegooi en hulle het dit vertrap en nou het hulle ook omgedraai en wil jou verslind, moet nou net nie soos hulle word en reaksionisties optree nie. Bly jy op die rigting wat jy ingeslaan het en bly aan die liefde se kant, hulle uitsprake spreek van haat en nyd en boosheid en aan die einde van die dag is al gevloek en uitprake van haat ‘n hulp kreet van alleen en doelloos en sinnelose ronddobbelary.

    Like

    • Michelle believes that she is not entitled to think for herself, that it is a sin to do so. This makes her continual cut and paste comments less interesting than watching paint dry because at least something happens when paint dries, the solvent evaporates, there are chemical changes etc. Her worldview is as static as that of an embalmed corpse.

      Like

    • Johann, there are many, many things under the sun that are not fully understood yet. Yet you, you lazy non-thinker, prefer to sit with your hands folded in prayer. Prayer has achieved absolutely nothing for anyone on the planet. It’s wanking above the waist and much less honest than actually tossing oneself off.

      Like

  12. Wat het van Analfatjie geword? Het die intellektuele hitte in die kombuis haar doodgeskroei? Johann is lankal dood dis net sy ego wat hier praat.

    Like

  13. Why talking to a Christian is like trying to have an intelligent conversation with a child suffering from Down’s syndrome.
    ______________________________________

    11 Reasons Why America’s Christians Are Religiously STUPID (and Atheists are smarter)

    Okay, so by now you’ve probably heard the news: A lot of Christians are intellectually challenged when it comes to matters of faith.

    Well, duh. They call that news? Of course, we failed the test. Sheesh. What did people expect?

    It was administered by liberals!!!!!

    (i.e… smart people)

    But seriously, BIG DEAL… so the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life found that the average Protestant and Roman Catholic in America is sort of dumb when it comes to religion… WHO CARES?!

    We don’t…

    Oh… I almost forgot… the study also found that Jews, Mormons, agnostics, and atheists are like totally major religious smarty pants.

    Does this really surprise anybody?! Golly gee, were you born again yesterday?

    But seriously, who cares? Like who cares?! We have Jesus in our hearts and they don’t.

    Who’s laughing now?!

    Huh?

    Yes… all of those other people are really smart but they are going to burn in Hell. See? That’s the trade off for being smart in this world…

    Eternity in Hell. (That’s a really long time.)

    Now do you see why we’re dumb? Do you see it?! We can’t become more intelligent than our belief in Hell…

    Anyway, the basics of the study is this…

    On average, Americans correctly answer 16 of the 32 religious knowledge questions on the survey by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life. Atheists and agnostics average 20.9 correct answers. Jews and Mormons do about as well, averaging 20.5 and 20.3 correct answers, respectively. Protestants as a whole average 16 correct answers; Catholics as a whole, 14.7. Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons perform better than other groups on the survey even after controlling for differing levels of education.

    Okay… so the media is like BLOWING this news out of proportion. We scored a 50%! Yes, we got half of the answers wrong… but we also got half of the answers right?! Why don’t they talk about that.

    And you know very well the dirty rotten liberals at the Pew Forum (P.U. Forum, if you ask me!) probably performed this study in the lobby of a convention center where Joyce Meyer was having one of her conferences. Sheesh. I guess we should be thanking our lucky stars that we got 50% of the answer correct.

    And my gosh… what is up with you Roman Catholics?! Seriously, you’re stupider than us evangelicals. (I think it’s because you guys believe in transubstantiation. Just a guess.)

    Okay, so on to the point of this post: Why did America’s Christians fail the religion 101 test?

    Here are my 11 guesses…

    Well, like duh… Christianity isn’t a religion… it’s a RELATIONSHIP. (Now who are the dumb dumbs?) Questions about Christianity shouldn’t have even been on the test.

    The Apostle Paul said that knowledge puffeth up! So there. All you Jesusless people are fatties. (We are skinny.)

    Alabama has A LOT of Christians. Seriously, it does. And sometimes they aren’t too bright.

    Faith is the evidence of things unseen. See?! Get it? It don’t take brains to have faith, people! Duh.

    There were questions about Lucifer’s religions on that test! Of course, we didn’t know the answers. We shun all the things that Lucifer loves! (And like, hello?–he’s a Muslim.)

    Fox News was not involved in this particular study… if they had, the results would have been soooooo different.

    Better is one day being a dumbass in the presence of the Lord than like a hundred billion million as a smart atheist.

    Sarah Palin took the test. We should have been given a curve. It’s not really our fault that she’s not a Mormon.

    The Bible says that Hell is for smart people. Was that on the test?! Was it? No. People who made that test were smart!

    Just because we CAN do all things through Christ who strengthens us doesn’t mean we WILL. But we could. If we wanted to. We could. Which was totally the point that the Apostle Paul was trying to make. We CAN/COULD do all things through Christ if we wanted to. Sometimes we don’t want to.

    http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/jesusneedsnewpr/2010/09/11-reasons-why-americas-christians-are-religiously-stupid-and-atheists-are-smarter.html

    Like

  14. Johann lyk my jy het nou seergekry. Moet nie jou siel kom beseer hier in cyber space nie. Jy het toe al die tyd ‘n kink in jou armour.

    Like

  15. Hy is blerrie mal die ding! Hy hou hom dom astrant om te kom aandag soek. Sy vrou gee hom seker nie baie aandag nie. Hyt kom probeer maatjies maak waar hy nie welkom is nie. Ons sal vir ewig en altyd voel soos ons voel en dink soos ons dink.

    Like

    • Praat vir jouself, en as jy vir ewig en ewig gaan voel soos jy nou voel, wat is die sin daarin? Klim eerder uit jou boksie uit en en begin om die “lewe” te ervaar. Dis so maklik al wat jy hoef te doen is wat ek jou al lankal gevra het as jy net jou hardegat van ontslae kan raak, al is dit net vir een dag. . .!” get a life” ( Moet net nis so dom wees om na jou eie dogma toe te probeer spring nie, maak net ‘n sprong na die “lig” toe . . .dis al )

      Like

    • I get so sickened by cruelty. I caught my once a week maid messing up the toasted sandwiches meant for the new gardener, a young kid recently out of school looking for some pocket money. She opened the snackwich, took off the top layers of toast, scraped off the cheese, leaving the bottom two pieces of toast dry, and closed the snackwich again. I asked her why the hell she did it. She gave no answer. There is plenty of food in the house, she could have taken a sandwich, but she had to mess the food up out of spite. Now for the rigmarole of verbal warning reduced to writing, followed by written warning, followed by dismissal. Her attitude sucks of late – wants to have a say in who I hire to work in the garden, wants to be paid for taking off days for funerals which are in any case held on a Saturday, wants more days paid work a week, wants wants wants wants ….. and I want to see less less less less of her and she only comes in one day a week which is all I could possibly need and stand for.

      Like

  16. There’s a movie that’s just come out, called Calvary, about a man who goes for confession to a Catholic priest and tells him that he was sexually abused by a Catholic priest as a child and that he has made up his mind to kill a priest. The priest taking this confession is his target. The priest cannot see the man because he is in the blacked out confessional box. This is set in a small village with various villainous characters and the priest has to work out who wants so kill him. He can’t go to the police because then he will be breaking the rule of confessional privilege. I will pre-order the dvd on Kalahari.

    Like

  17. As jy so ‘n groot waaier van Tim is – sou jy sê dat jy hom “worship” siende dat die niemand eintlik weet wat “worshep” in die alledaagse lewe beteken nie.
    En dan suggureer jy dat as jy na Tim luister wonder jy oor “iets”, maar jy kan blykbaar nie vertel wat die “iets” is nie, wat in my realiteit niksseggend is.
    En ek gee om wat julle attie fundies dink, veral oor wat julle so seker maak dat julle reg is en die res verkeerd.
    En ek wil ook graag wil weet die “pad” wat jy ingeslaan het van rasionalisasie, intelek, “bewyse” ens. . . maak dit jou toe ‘n happy tjappie

    Like

  18. Jou webblad is besig om sy albasters te verloor, wat natuurlik volgens julle attie fundies net as toevallig sal beskou, maar nie ek nie.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s