Do Atheists really consider Christians less intelligent?

Post Reply New Topic

Some say that "behemoth" and "leviathan" were documented, in the Bible, before they were recognized by materialists.

Ouch... there are a lot of these examples though. The Earth is flat with four square corners. Smash your babies against the wall. etc...

urbandictionary


Does it mean your are more or less intelligent if you can catch you are being brainwashed by those around you? Pretty sure that consideration is the main that comes across the mind of many an Atheist when thinking about the question in the OP.

http://www.truthingenesis.com/2013/01/0 ... the-bible/

https://9gag.com/gag/aep7M0q/god-vs-satan-fossils

The concepts of evolution began with a Hellenistic, religious bias -- not from material observation.

The atom of philosophers is the singularity. They tell you how it became the Big Bang, from circular to elliptical movements, assumed to generate energy. Have you seen it to be so, or is it inferred.

The discussion of alchemy, in which base metals would become noble (which is the basis of chemistry) came from a discussion of eugenics, from Plato's Republic, in which the root races of mankind would evolve, due to social stresses.

Atheists think that they're progressive but have actually retrofitted ancient paganism and flights of fancy.

You insult the savages and the visionaries, for their primitive, scientific discoveries, then patent those for yourself, then troll the patent office, for your source of inspiration. They say it was trance-channeled and came from muses or spirit guides.

I haven't insulted any savages or visionaries,usually Christian or Muslim Fundies do that.
Trolling the patent office sounds dull.Unlikely to inspire me.

What have you invented, out of nothing, and can you show it to us?

Like the xerox which loses resolution after progressive copies, and the signal which becomes noisy with more transmission, and the game of telephone which becomes ever more garbled, it has been suggested that all orders of information are derived from a higher, mathematical order. If you were to take this same line of reasoning, to an absolutist extreme, the thermodynamic law of entropy has a corollary. It can be said, in the abstract sense, that the natural order would be supernatural in origin and the first cause of all things would be all knowing, as nature is prone to decay.

Where did I mention inventing anything?
I could say my art,becuse what comes out of my head is unique to me.Not going to show it here.
Nothing new under the Sun anyhow.

If they're blatantly ignorant of evolution, this kind of raises some questions. However, overall intelligence typically has nothing to do with one's own religious views (or lack thereof).

I know plenty of non-christians who are total idiots, so it's a bad way to judge all around.

Whether or not you agree with the Creationist bias, thorough Creationists discuss both opinions in fine detail.

For instance, Creationists recognize the relative depth of fossils. They explain that evolutionists use it as a dating method. But, Creationists have a different theory.

Firstly, short halflife radioisotopes are so imprecise, that they give different dates for parts of the same animal. They are losing resolution, exponentially, every so many hundreds of years, when you are supposed to be measuring in the millions.

Some trees would have grown through several eons of strata.

But, the heaviest things sink, first, in case of rapid sedimentation.

It's secularly possible to believe in genetic engineering and catastrophism, had you no emotional triggers. Several have claimed that stable mutations can result from disparate hybrids. You're allowed to say that, when no pedagogues are policing the discussion. It's not Sharia.

I was a Christian for many years. I was raised Catholic and was very devout when younger. My Mum was Protestant though, and brought me up to question that faith constantly. At my christening, she told the priest that she would only raise me Catholic 'to a point'.

I became a Quaker in my university days and then a Zen Buddhist in my twenties. I explored various other spiritual beliefs, as well.

I'm an atheist/antitheist now. I don't believe in God and I dislike religion in general. The dislike of religion is more prominent in my mind than the lack of faith in God. Am I more intelligent as a result? No, not really. My position has been arrived as as result of the way I think, which was always there.

Whether or not someone is intelligent is more dependent (imo) on the way they think than what beliefs they have. I have sympathy with people who hold religious beliefs because I used to hold them myself. What I dislike (but not necessarily see as a lack of intelligence) is people who go against sense and won't go to the end of their thoughts. 'I have too much invested in this belief, so I won't question it,' type people. Screw them.

I mentioned it.

Does it require advanced planning, intelligence, and purpose. Should someone think that a piece of artwork occurred as a result of random, natural forces. Say, as one plant fiber, at a time, laid upon itself, to create a woven canvas.

Materialists can still say that there is an unassigned variable, in the equation, without religion or cult behavior. You don't have to speculate that the painting was left by a Flying Spaghetti Monster or Purple People Eater.

It most likely just popped out of a black hole.
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-origin-of ... verse.html