Are ‘Intuitive’ Thinkers More Likely to Believe in a Higher Power?
- Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:15pm by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
Does God exist? This question continues to cause debate and scrutiny in nearly every corner of the globe.
Most atheists, when debating with the religious, demand hard proof that a higher power exists — a tangible evidence that believers simply cannot provide. Meanwhile, the faithful often point to a “gut feeling” in explaining their belief that a god (or gods, even) oversees the universe.
It is these internal emotions that many atheists scoff at, as they contend that an individual’s feelings cannot serve as a substitute for viable proof.
Interestingly, a new Harvard University study is saying that “gut feelings” may play a very important role in determining who goes to church and who doesn’t. The study, which was published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, has found that the more instinctive or intuitive an individual is, the more likely he or she is to believe in God.
On the flip side, others who extensively think details over and over again in their minds may, in fact, be less likely to believe. UPI provides a comprehensive explanation of these two opposing thought processes:
Amitai Shenhav, a doctoral student of Harvard University in Boston, explained intuitive thinking means going with one’s first instinct and reaching decisions quickly based on automatic cognitive processes, while reflective thinking involves the questioning of first instinct and consideration of other possibilities — allowing for counterintuitive decisions.
As LiveScience.com reports, “The findings suggest that basic differences in thinking style can influence religious belief.” Shenhav explains:
“Some say we believe in God because our intuitions about how and why things happen lead us to see a divine purpose behind ordinary events that don’t have obvious human causes.
This led us to ask whether the strength of an individual’s beliefs is influenced by how much they trust their natural intuitions versus stopping to reflect on those first instincts.”
In order to investigate how intuition plays into belief (or unbelief) in God, the researchers reached out to 882 American adults through an online survey. The survey, which focused upon their belief in God, was followed by a three-question math test. As it turns out, those who spent more time reflecting on each question — relying less on intuition — got the answers correct.
Here’s the interesting part when it comes to belief: The people who went with their intuition on the test were one and a half times more likely to believe in God when compared to those who actually got the questions right. The Harvard Crimson explains:
The study found that intuitive thinkers not only tend to believe more strongly in the existence of God, but their faith also grows more certain over time. Alternatively, reflective thinkers become less certain of the existence of God over time.
In the end, researchers plan to continue investigating how genes and education influence thinking and they contend that neither intuition nor reflection is superior.
While atheists may contend that believers don’t think deeply enough and are, thus, hoodwinked into believing in a higher power, the religious could respond by stating that non-believers overanalyze and often miss the signs and symbols that are directly in front of them.
(h/t LiveScience.com)
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 684 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 648 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 361 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 318 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 182 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 212 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 182 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (153)
Elena2010
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:07pmMoses was a clever fellow, well educated in the most advanced civilization of its day. God spoke to Him on all our behalf and gave us rules to live by using the idiom and understanding of the day.
They knew nothing of germs, genetics, or carcinogens. YET, Torah (5 books of Moses) presupposes all of the above and that God cared enough for us to warn us away fm this things.
Torah warns – don’t marry your sister; bury your poop; don’t incinerate your steak but cook it done for the life is in the blood; don’t eat carrion eaters (pigs, sharks, raptors, shellfish).
Why? We don’t want genetic deformities or destroyed interpersonal relationships. Raw sewage transmits disease (just ask Medieval Paris!). The germs are in the blood. Botulism and other hard-to-kill parasites are rife in carrion eaters; besides that most carrion eaters are ultra-high in bad cholesterol. Incinerating your meat releases chemicals that cause cancer – sorry Burger King.
God uses our language where we are in time to protect us fm the things He knows will harm us! God loved us enough to protect us when we listen, trust, and obey.
Yes, atheists, God exists, knows your names, and loves you just the same! He’d like you to get to know Him, regardless of the evils that may have befallen you to date.
Report Post »TH30PH1LUS
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:31pmIsaac Newton, arguably one of the most brilliant of our species – wrote more about his religious ponderings than about scientific theory.
Also check out: Galileo Galilei, Louis Pasteur, Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Rene Descartes, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, Albert of Saxony, Albertus Magnus, Giovanni Antonelli, Daniello Bartoli, Ruđer Bošković, and Georges Lemaître.
Modern Science rests squarely on the shoulders of brilliant men (and women) who had a profound faith in God.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 2:21pmI’ve heard of reading too far into things, but I’ve never actually seen someone legitimately argue that books of Moses warned people away from high cholesterol or carcinogens. You’d think God would have said something less vague, like “don’t inhale smoke“ or ”eat your vegetables, slow down on the meat.” Odd that he didn’t warn them away from beef or forbid animal sacrifices, huh?
Report Post »vennoye
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 3:08pmLocked
Report Post »Your sarcasm is “cute”, but Elena2010 is absolutely correct. When people have health problems today, their doctors tell them not to eat swine, fat, shell fish, etc. The instructions he gave to Moses then, still work today…what a shame that we don’t do the research into the reasons why he gave them. Bet we would be a whole lot more healthly and need fewer doctors!!
trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 3:18pmYeah, maybe…But give up pork? No way! The pig is the perfect eating animal, think about it; ham, bacon, pork chops, ribs…so many great flavors out of one butt ugly animal…
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 3:38pmscientists that believe in creation:
Gerald E. Aardsma (physicist and radiocarbon dating)
Louis Agassiz (helped develop the study of glacial geology and of ichthyology)
Alexander Arndt (analytical chemist, etc.)
Steven A. Austin (geologist and coal formation expert)
Charles Babbage (helped develop science of computers / developed actuarial tables and the calculating machine)
Francis Bacon (developed the Scientific Method)
Thomas G. Barnes (physicist)
Robert Boyle (helped develop sciences of chemistry and gas dynamics)
Wernher von Braun (pioneer of rocketry and space exploration)
David Brewster (helped develop science of optical mineralogy)
Arthur V. Chadwick (geologist)
Melvin Alonzo Cook (physical chemist, Nobel Prize nominee)
Georges Cuvier (helped develop sciences of comparative anatomy and vertebrate paleontology)
Humphry Davy (helped develop science of thermokinetics)
Donald B. DeYoung (physicist, specializing in solid-state, nuclear science and astronomy)
Henri Fabre (helped develop science of insect entomology)
Michael Faraday (helped develop science of electromagnetics / developed the Field Theory / invented the electric generator)
Danny R. Faulkner (astronomer)
Ambrose Fleming (helped develop science of electronics / invented thermionic valve)
Robert V. Gentry (physicist and chemist)
Duane T. Gish (biochemist)
John Grebe (chemist)
Joseph Henry (invented the electric mot
rangerp
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 3:41pmscientist that believe in creation.
Gerald E. Aardsma (physicist and radiocarbon dating)
Louis Agassiz (helped develop the study of glacial geology and of ichthyology)
Alexander Arndt (analytical chemist, etc.) [more info]
Steven A. Austin (geologist and coal formation expert) [more info]
Charles Babbage (helped develop science of computers / developed actuarial tables and the calculating machine)
Francis Bacon (developed the Scientific Method)
Thomas G. Barnes (physicist) [more info]
Robert Boyle (helped develop sciences of chemistry and gas dynamics)
Wernher von Braun (pioneer of rocketry and space exploration)
David Brewster (helped develop science of optical mineralogy)
Arthur V. Chadwick (geologist) [more info]
Melvin Alonzo Cook (physical chemist, Nobel Prize nominee) [more info]
Georges Cuvier (helped develop sciences of comparative anatomy and vertebrate paleontology)
Humphry Davy (helped develop science of thermokinetics)
Donald B. DeYoung (physicist, specializing in solid-state, nuclear science and astronomy) [more info]
Henri Fabre (helped develop science of insect entomology)
Michael Faraday (helped develop science of electromagnetics / developed the Field Theory / invented the electric generator)
Danny R. Faulkner (astronomer) [more info]
Ambrose Fleming (helped develop science of electronics / invented thermionic valve)
Robert V. Gentry (physicist and chemist) [more info]
Duane T.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 5:01pmIntuitiveness is nothing more then instincts processing information faster then the conscience. Some people are more in touch with their senses and others are not. These intuitive feelings are simply information your sub conscience is warning of thru the body that the conscience hasn’t figured out or understand yet.
Example: your sitting and watching tv and your gut begins to tell you someone is watching you. Are you paranoid or are your senses picking up info your sub conscience processed your conscience doesn’t recognize or ignores.
The Holy Spirit is way more then some gut feeling. It’s powerful and you know when your filled with it. We believers must remember Thomas had to actually feel the scars before he could believe. He needed physical proof even after seeing miracles first hand. We must be patient and loving to doubters.
Moses had faith and followed God without question. Yes, Elena2010 is correct. With 20/20 hindsight we can clearly see God was leading Moses to help His people, to guide them and Moses obeyed and listened. With this hindsight and expansion of knowledge we can understand why, germs, blood, and cooking meat.
Good post!
Report Post »pollyanna
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 7:02pmBeautiful post. Thank you!
Report Post »usaywhat
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 7:49pmA wise post.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 8:45pm@RangerP Nice cut and paste. Makes you seem smart. Let me cite your source for you.
Report Post »http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-scientists.html
SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 8:46pm@RangerP How does God feel about plagiarism?
Report Post »Locked
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:00pm@Vennoye
Thanks, I try!
“people have health problems today, their doctors tell them not to eat swine, fat, shell fish, etc.”
… or beef. Or they tell them to stop smoking. The issue is not that God was telling Moses “hey, you’re gonna get heart disease” (because He wasn’t) but that people now attempt to put their own spin on the Bible. That‘s called heresy where I’m from. In psychological circles it’s called hindsight bias: oh, of COURSE Moses was talking about warding off heart disease! It‘s obvious NOW that when he gave instruction on burning sacrifices that they couldn’t be too burnt or the people would get cancer!
Thinking like this is simply making things up to try and reconcile illogical rules from millennia ago with health advice from today; to make what we don’t understand more applicable to the modern day. Here’s an idea: there‘s a reason we don’t follow every rule in the OT today, and that reason is JESUS. Additional explanation and reading too much into things? Not needed.
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:18pm@SovereignSoul
I am a cut and paste master. Does that list not scream internet site info?
Some things are beyond obvious. Good catch there though, keep me honest.
If you want to actually debate something (other than my spelling and grammer) step up to the plate.
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:21pm@SovereignSoul
being you asked about plagerism
What is the only Bible translation that was never copy writed? the answer would be the KJV, thus I can cut and past it also.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:35pmYou should still cite your sources as a common courtesy to the original. That is common knowledge in graduate school.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 11:33pm@SoveirgnSoul
What does God say about hypocrites? Did you cite the source you learned/copied from in reference to citing sources? Everything you learn and repeat is copy and pasted……Quit trying to pick fights and stop mocking God.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 12:20amMocking God!? Really?
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 1:12amYou really think God cares if someone copies and pastes information without “citing” from who? I don’t. And to imply so, “How does God feel about Plagiarism”, is honestly mocking God.
Have a great night!
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 1:37amI’m pretty sure God said not to steal and not to lie. Maybe I’m wrong.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 1:39amI would think God cares about everything, by the way. All-knowing, all-seeing and all-powerful is the God I learned about. Maybe your God is different.
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 3:21amSoveirgnSoul
You are correct, God did say not to steal and not to bear false witness. That is truth.
It is a lie to say copying and pasting is stealing, especially in the manner Ranger P conducted.
To use God falsely is mocking God.
God does not care if you copy and paste and to say so is a mockery of God. You are trying to use God to chastise another over something irrelevant and actually false. You are mocking God and his purpose.
Take care.
Report Post »Susan Harkins
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 11:13amWell, I am an “INTJ” and an Agnostic…
.. and I have a “gut feeling” that both Atheists & Deists have it all wrong.
;;wink wink;;
Report Post »Susan Harkins
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 11:21amIn 1914, 11 years before the Scopes “monkey” trial and four decades before the discovery of the structure of DNA, psychologist James Leuba asked 1,000 U.S. scientists about their views on God. He found the scientific community evenly divided, with 42% saying that they believed in a personal God and the same number saying they did not. Scientists have unearthed many important fossils since then, but they are, if anything, more likely to believe in God today.
The scientific community is, however, much less religious than the general public. In Pew surveys, 95% of American adults say they believe in some form of deity or higher power.
And the public does not share scientists’ certainty about evolution. While 87% of scientists say that life evolved over time due to natural processes, only 32% of the public believes this to be true, according to a different Pew poll earlier this year.
Given that scientists are much less likely than the general public to believe in God, it’s not surprising that the percentage who are affiliated with a particular religion is also lower. Nearly half of U.S. scientists say they have no religious affiliation — describing themselves as atheist, agnostic or nothing in particular — compared with 17% of all Americans.
Report Post »Ghandi was a Republican
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:06pmA. Gotta have a soul – and B. Spirituality..
Report Post »Can’t really have God without it…
DanWesson455
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:06pmNone of these thinkers can tell us where it all started. Nor when except for a BANG of a Singularity. Well someone put that Singularity there if that is what one wants to believe. So……..what then?
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 8:49pmNone of these believers can tell us where it all started. Nor when, except for an omnipotent almighty. Well someone put that almighty there if that is what one wants to believe. So……..what then?
Report Post »jb.kibs
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:14pmwhat was the very first seed?
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:18pmBy definition God is eternal. He has no beginning or end. Everything else requires a first cause. So by necessity God must exist.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:59pmPerhaps God is capable of creating a singularity. Perhaps he can cause that singularity to erupt in a “Big Bang”. Why would anyone doubt his ability to do so? I don’t know that God exists. I don’t know that God does not exist. I’m humble enough to say, “I don’t know.” I’m pretty sure that if he exists and he wants me, he knows where to find me.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:14pmSure, God could have created the Big Bang. However the order disagrees with what Genesis tells us.
Report Post »Hekatonkhires
Posted on September 24, 2011 at 7:27amNee to watch Expelled by Ben Stein.. very interesting and well put together..
Report Post »UlyssesP
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:03pmHow about some real science.
Report Post »“Serotonin is primarily found in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, platelets, and in the central nervous system (CNS) of animals including humans. It is a contributor to feelings of well-being and is also known to contribute to happiness.”
Maybe the “gut” can think.
Tim Law
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:01pmWhat a joke 882 people in a survey, I’m surprised that number is even considered. Not enough data for even a large city, let alone a State or Nation. Faith is the one thing we all have in common, no matter how you think, your race, your age, or your income. We all have faith in something. The question is, is your faith placed in a valid place, or is it misplaced? I am a reflective thinker, I question everything. I think the only place faith is not misplaced is in GOD. There have been many reflective thinkers throughout history that have tried to disprove GOD, and came to be believers.
Report Post »This is just another ploy by progressive’s to try and undermine faith. The message is if you believe in GOD your stupid, problem for them is we’re not! Socialism and GOD don’t mix, socialist want to be god’s and rule over us all.
But there is only one GOD and he is GREAT! May he bless this Nation and all it’s people!
trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:13pm“There have been many reflective thinkers throughout history that have tried to disprove GOD, and came to be believers.”
Awesome! Wish I had that thought.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:34pmI was thinking the same thing regarding the sample size. It’s laughably small. Additionally, it was an online survey, which are problematic when it comes to developing a fair sample across all demos. That being stated, the writer of the article really should have mentioned that many great thinkers have transitioned to belief from non-belief based on evidence and analysis. It also would have been beneficial to point out previous studies showing that teleological explanations begin unprovoked at a young age, and the link between atheism and autistic traits.
I also find myself perplexed by how many people of faith allow atheists to conflate “proof” with “evidence”, and also allow them to get away with the “lack of evidence” claim…this article being yet another example of that. The problem is not a lack of evidence, it is more often a lack of consistency in how the atheist determines what evidence is valid, and what isn’t. Presumption is the ultimate goalpost mover.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 2:31pm“What a joke 882 people in a survey, I’m surprised that number is even considered.”
You have never studied or taken a course in statistics, I would imagine? The important variable is the standard deviation of that number. The larger the number the smaller the deviation, but it’s perfectly logical to get a decent estimate with numbers that look “small.” That‘s why it’s so rare to see polling results drastically differ from projections; they might be off by a percentage or two, but they’re usually within the range given… why? Because the standard deviation states that we’re 95% certain the number will fall within that range.
My bigger issue would be how the survey was conducted; here it said “online.” What were the parameters? Who received it? Was it sent out through e-mail, did people have to go to the site to take it? What was the background of the responders; did the researchers make sure to take into account geographical location, income, sex, race, and religious background?
If any of those questions weren’t taken into account, the study would be invalid as the sample wouldn’t be representative.
Report Post »Orangephi
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 4:42pmAMEN brother!!
Report Post »Wyoming
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 7:01pmYep – looks like they really put their boots to the ground to get those results – I am sure I paid for it too.
Report Post »Bearfoot
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:00pmFor God’s wrath is being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing the truth in an unrighteous way, 19 because what may be known about God is manifest among them, for God made it manifest to them. 20 For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their unintelligent heart became darkened. 22 Although asserting they were wise, they became foolish 23 and turned the glory of the incorruptible God into something like the image of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed creatures and creeping things. – Romans 1:18-23
The created things all around us testify to our Creator, Jehovah God.
Those who deny the creation are truly empty-headed.
Report Post »RejectFalseIcons
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:58pmThe problem with modern mysticism is that it has little to do with god/gods/whatever and too much to do with the surrender of individuals to a higher mortal power. It is not the mystical that causes me to withhold my faith in religion, it is the mystic telling me that for some unexplained reason he has a closer connection to god. Religion has been a tool of control for far too long for any modern religion to be trusted blindly. The most rational of the modern faiths, however, is Judaism – a Rabbi claims no exclusive ties to the divine.
Report Post »cykoaudio
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 2:54pmwouldn’t someone,a “mystic”, have a closer connection to the divine if he admits its there,like the wind which cannot be seen or heard but felt & seen through the leaves ruffling-wouldn’t they,who seek out the divine night & day,question it,look for it,& knock on that door,would they not indeed have a closer connection than one who denies its existence?? if you disown your family,you’re not going to have a close relationship to them,right?..but if you were adopted,didn’t know your birth parents,but sought them out everyday but didn’t find them,you wouldn’t deny they existed right?.you know we all are born from a man&woman,so by association at least, you know your birth parents are out there,even if you never found them-see the problem with those that don’t believe in God is ego-like U2 says we all have a “God shaped hole in our heart”.& ppl try to fill it with toys,cars,sex etc-but to let God in you need to take yourself out,which means sacrifice,& those that don‘t believe aren’t willing to take that chance..in a word,atheists are moral cowards,because they say “I have to sacrifice all this stuff for a gamble?something I can’t see?I have to give up my ego for a god you say I need to have faith in? I want proof first”..but the Bible says “blessed are those who have not seen,but yet believe”,when Jesus rose,& (doubting) Thomas said”unless I see His hands,the print of the nails,&my hand into His side(where spear punctured),I will not believe”-don’t be Tom
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:54pmAll I know is this article was written by an unsaved individual. But this is no surprise because this is what happens every time an unbeliever tries to study faith. They miss the real proof. It is not a “gut feeling” it is a life conversion. It is a personal relationship. It is having the blindfold removed. But the worst part of this article is it tries to lump believers into unthinking, non-intellectual simpletons while atheists are rational, critical thinkers. No bias there? Being a reflective thinker myself, and having come to my faith through critical examination of the facts, I have to laugh at the conclusion this study reaches:
“Amitai Shenhav, a doctoral student of Harvard University in Boston, explained intuitive thinking means going with one’s first instinct and reaching decisions quickly based on automatic cognitive processes, while reflective thinking involves the questioning of first instinct and consideration of other possibilities — allowing for counterintuitive decisions.”
In other words, they simply second guess God. Glad you guys figured that out!
Report Post »bill984
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:52pm“reflective thinking ”
Report Post »just means you are to unsure of yourself to make a decision, on anything.
Brizz
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:36pmThis study is a joke, right?
Looks like the study is trying to say that the faithful don’t think.
Question with boldness anyone?
Report Post »4q2obama
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:51pm“For I do not seek to understand that I may believe,but I believe in order to understand.For this
Report Post »also I believe,that unless I believed,I should not understand”
ST,ANSELM,Doctor of the church.Prosologion,chapter 1
DEUS VULT!
Brad Wesselmann
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:50pmAnd I’m sure they are working off of a federal grant to research what cannot possibly be proven either way…not without dying first and coming back to life to tell the story.
I feel better when they are just wasting money counting sperm in elephant semen…at least they won’t try to tell me I am stupid because I have faith.
Report Post »hi
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:50pmHow about a study on why libs vote for taxes but cheat on their own.
Report Post »BUDDY LITTLE
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:47pmMathematically Statistically speaking ,”this all happened by chance?” Has no chance!
Report Post »Evil_Conservative
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:08pmRight. Put in context the origin of creation by secularists, the Big Bang. While there is strong scientific evidence to support an event that would be creation, the explanations of how that came to be are very weak. Ever heard a scientist try to invoke quantum randomness to explain the origin of everything? It sounds and is ridiculous. Something came before and caused the Big Bang. Something of unimaginable power. Nothing makes sense other than that being God.
Report Post »cykoaudio
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:41pmfurthermore,have you ever heard Dawkins explanation when broken down to how LIFE came into being her on earth?? he answers-in Ben Steins movie “Expelled”- either crystals or aliens…sounds like a “gut feeling” to me,or more like science fiction…& how about C.SLewis who was atheist while dumb & young,then after becoming learned man,also became Christian..how about MIT prof. Gerald Schroeder,who not only remains believer after decades of becoming one of the worlds most proiminent physicists,but has exacted modern science with first verses of Genesis & found they match up like fitting puzzle pieces…in fact most lib atheist college kids would be disapponted to find out how many scientists have become believers/deists at least AFTER learning the truth about the physics of the universe,like how mathematically improbable evolution is,or that Darwin rejected his theories near end of his life because he didn’t mean to drive ppl away from religion…or scientists that have helped crack code of DNA finding that the more we learn about it, the less likely evolution seems…or Cambrian explosion helps creationists argument,or the fact that if humans share common ancestor w/apes,over millions of years there would be millions of fossils to be found that show transition over millions of years..but evolutionist/atheists don’t want to think that “reflectively”,they want to stick w/their “gut” felling
Report Post »Johnny916
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:47pmI’m a Deist and I do agree with this report. Look at the differences between people who identify as religious or spiritual and then look at someone who would see themselves as Atheist, Agnostic, or Deist.
Report Post »If you go with your “gut” or how you feel about something; then looking it from all the angles then I can safely say the individual will most likely chose to be religious.
RLTW
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:45pmActs 8: 30
Report Post »eaglenva
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:45pmWHAT. 882 test subjects through an online survey are the basis to form a hypothesizes. Surprised that we have not seen a study that bears don’t sh&t in woods :-)
Report Post »Polwatcher
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:42pmToday, most of our government schools endoctrinate. This reduces the possibility of our kids learning to think for themselves. I’m sure the government is not intending to foster a belief in God.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:15pm“I’m sure the government is not intending to foster a belief in God.”
I hope not, it is not the government’s role to preach about old magic men in the sky (we are a secular Nation, witha first Amendment that prevents the establishment of a religion).
Report Post »Enciloon
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 2:41pmAs most of you know the only role of the government is to give me more money
Report Post »joe1234
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 3:18pm“we are a secular Nation, witha first Amendment that prevents the establishment of a religion).”
good I am glad you atheists are taking responsibility for slavery and the treatment of native americans…where there is secularism, there is slavery.
Report Post »Cesium
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:21pm@joe1234 Perfectly condoned in the bible, just follow the rules.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:41pm“@joe1234 Perfectly condoned in the bible, just follow the rules.”
Hmmm….Not condoned…Just acknowledged.
Report Post »Cesium
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 4:20pmTraining for Trolltrainer… There are very specific rules to owning slaves in the bible. Beyond acknowledged. It is assumed practice for people, … as long as you follow the rules, slavery a-OK. Rules include beating your slave near death (for whatever reason) a-ok unless they die.. If death happens then you are punished. If you hurt them they could be set free… etc etc… it is assumed that people will have slaves.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 7:11pmGood job citing verses taken out of context. The Bible also says pink unicorns will one day take over the world…Whatever…
Report Post »Cesium
Posted on September 24, 2011 at 1:52ambible does not say anything about unicorns. …and yes I know. Slave is another cryptic misinterpretation lost in translation and context… please tell me about the slave.. lets see what can we make up to fit our desires… slave is a dog? ooh I know, slave is your ego(before freud was freud) that you must keep in control… Or I got it, god knew we’d have computers and is merely talking about how to manage finicky secondary hard-drives.
Report Post »Cesium
Posted on September 24, 2011 at 1:56am*{does not say anything about “pink” unicorns] almost messed that one up. bible has only the real unicorns.
Report Post »rfycom
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:40pmand if God truly exists he created both of these thinkers.
Report Post »cykoaudio
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 3:04pmand if you’re truly “reflective” thinker & open minded you won’t mind trying praying to God that He show Himself to you in some way…& tell me a week later that you didn’t see a dozen things you never saw before in the most coincidental of ways…your point is a basic myth of atheists,not saying you are one,but I’ve heard Rick Gervais say “why did God make me an atheist”?..which is absolutely moronic,..God allows free thought,free will, we make our own choices,our own decisions,our own thinking..God doesn’t make anyone an atheist anymore than He makes someone a Christian or Jew…anymore than ppl like to say,”why did God allow babies in Africa to get Aids?”..He didn’t,WE DID..WE make ourselves atheists,believers,owners of diseases,STD’s,& if you are sexually promiscuous & have a baby your baby will have it too…God doesn’t desire ppl to go off the straight & narrow,but we do anyway,that IS OUR FAULT..God made the world beautiful,made us beautiful,WE MAKE IT UGLY…so don’t blame God for ill thinking,like atheism,or disease or killing or war..WE DO THAT JUST FINE ON OUR OWN..if you know anything of the Bible it says the fruits of the Spirit are joy,love,peace,patience,forgiveness….& that you judge a tree by its fruits..so its easy to tell who the real believers are,because they will exhibit those fruits,while those doing the blame God game,will bring forth sour,worm riddled fruit
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 8:58pmYou’ll have to explain more fully this concept of God and free will. If there is an omnipotent being who knows all that has happened and all that will happen, then he knows what choices each of us will make in the future: Therefore, I have no choice to make except the one God already knows that I will make. If I choose otherwise, I will have proven God wrong. I can’t have God AND free will.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:15pmsoverignsoul, that is a logical fallacy. Just because God knows what your choice will be does not detract from your free will to make that choice.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:50pmIt also does not allow me to make the other choice.
Report Post »To determine that my argument is a logical fallacy you must determine that one of my premises is false.
If premise A is true God is omnipotent
and premise B is true I Must follow the path God knows I will follow
Then C must also be true I am not free to follow another path.
I have no choice
trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 9:56pmyou were still free to choose your path. God simply knew which path you were going to choose. You could have equally chosen the other path, but God would have known that already too. It was still your choice. Just as now you freely turn from God. Later in life you may embrace him. If that is your path then He already knows that and may even use you in the future for His purposes. But it is still your choice. He does not control you or your will, He gives you that freedom.
Report Post »Rapunzel
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:02pm@SovereignSoul – remember that God created time; he does not exist in time like you and I but outside of time. He can see all of time at once…what has happened, what is happening, what will happen. The free will part is that we still make the choice; He does not force us to choose differently. Another possibility is that there are multiple possible future times and He sees them all – so He knows all our possible futures but we still determine which possible future it will be.
There are different Christian philosophies about free will and predestination, but the bottom line is this: Jesus Christ is our Creator and our Savior; He is the Way, the Truth and the Life and no one comes to the Father but by Him.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:03pmWhere in this argument have I turned from God? The argument is against the existence of free will. God has a plan for us all.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:11pm@TrollTrainer While I may respect your opinion, you are reverse engineering your argument (rationalization). Perhaps we have a differing definition of the word “choice”? Still, if my premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:23pmI think Rapunzel has hit on the problem you are having with this concept. God is outside time, just because you have not made your choice yet is irrelevant to God who is not bound to our linear time. He already sees what you have not done yet.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:31pmSince we are on the subject though I must admit I am a bit more Calvinistic than not. I still recognize free will but I do not think our will is as free as we would like to believe. The reason I must take this position is the fate of the unevangelized. People who never even heard the gospel and never had the chance to believe on Christ. How do you explain this? I do not believe in total predestination as a Calvinist does yet I do believe God placed these people in their position with the foreknowledge that they would not have chosen Him even if given the chance. I am well aware this premise has serious flaws, but it is the most satisfactory way I have found to explain this. This question is probably the biggest burden I have as far as theological questions. How does a loving God condemn someone who never had the chance to choose Christ?
Bottom line though, we DO have the choice. I am making the most of it with the understanding that I do not, nor ever will while I am on this earth, have the full picture.
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:41pmThank you. You have just proven my point. I am bound to do what he has already seen. Whether God exists in time or not is irrelavant. I exist in time. If God has seen what I will do tomorrow, how can I do anything else?
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:46pmI do not believe that either one of us will convince the other, but this has been a fun exercise. Understand that my argument was against free will and not the existence of God. Perhaps, one day we can debate the chicken and the egg. LOL
Report Post »Thank you for the civilized conversation. A refreshing change from the usual fare posted here.
trolltrainer
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 9:03amI do not know if you will make it back this way again, but if you do let me give you something to ponder. I am not necessarily expecting an answer, but think about this; If we do not have free will then WHY are we here? Why did God even create this world? If God decides our destiny, as a 5 point Calvinist would insist, then why the charade of earth, Adam and Eve, Noah, the Chosen People…All of it…Why bother? What is the NEED for Christ? Why not just place those destined for heaven in heaven and those destined for hell in hell? Further, why would a perfect God create imperfect beings? Why would God even create people destined for hell? How could Lucifer rebel if not for free will…and yes, Lucifer was an angel, but the example holds.
The reason why we are here is so we could make a single choice. Are we going to worship Jehovah God? If so then Christ gives us the way to choose eternal life so we can do so. This is the ONLY thing that makes sense. Without free will this is all moot. There is no longer a reason for any of this.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 9:05amOh, as a YEC that believes in a literal Genesis the chicken came first. :-)
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 9:12ameh, I keep having other thoughts…
You write, “I exist in time. If God has seen what I will do tomorrow, how can I do anything else?”
I understand your view, but simply reverse it. God has already seen what you will choose to do tomorrow. You WILL make the choice. God has simply seen which choice you made before you made it. This does not bind you to that choice. Can you change your mind? Sure, I do it all the time. But God has foreknowledge of this. That does not bind me to anything, it only makes God omniscient. The two are not mutually exclusive as you insist.
Report Post »Free2speakRN
Posted on September 23, 2011 at 1:23pmTrolltrainer, Hi.
Report Post »As to what you and SovereignSoul were disgussing, I think what you are ariving at, is Free Will vs. ‘Predestination’, as is the actual given question. Most mix this up with a thought of, Free Will vs……… ‘Pre-Determination’, which is quite different. The first pair go together as you said, the latter pair do not. To a point, we choose our destiny in our disire for God, but only by his ‘Grace’ can we of course be saved. We can also choose our destiny by ‘not wanting or caring to be with God. Then we are taken out of the ‘book’ in Revelation.
BTW?, as far as the ‘unforgivable sin’ of ‘blasphamy against the Holy Spirit’, in a word, it simply comes down to, ‘It is when one accepts God’s perfect justice, but not his mercy’.
SovereignSoul, hang in man. God always comes to us where we‘re ’at’. Not necessarily but, sometimes He enters most easily through a broken heart. I pray, don’t fight it. It’s the most sweet surrender we can experience… Alone with the Alone. Let God be God and don’t meddle with Him. It’s the passive work of God. Absolutely no work of the soul. It’s the prayer of the Mary, in the story of Martha and Mary. It’s called Contemplation. It’s quiet. It’s true. It is a Spirit ‘of’ Truth. It’s far beyond intuition. It’s Breath Itself.
Okie, beautiful words, my friend. “We must be patient and loving to doubters.” It is Him. It is the Way, through you.
Just wanted to say, hi, to all of you. Please pray for m
jueta
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:37pmAlso, it seems to me they are trying to make it seem that smart people don’t believe in God. I believe because of all the thinking I’ve done of all the things that work together but in opposite ways i.e. plants need co2 but give of o, we need o but put out co2. There are to many of these to be explained by an explosion.
Report Post »Elena2010
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:52pmCO2, O2 — pls capitalize the chemical symbols. O2 comes in a molecular-bonded molecule not free floating on its own. O3 is ozone which mostly inhabits the upper atmosphere to protect us fm UV radiation. Another of God’s wonderful gifts.
Yet, most of all, consider the simple H2O molecule! Unlike all other substances, it does not freeze fm the inside out rapidly. Rather, it freezes fm the top down slowly. Furthermore, frozen water is lighter (less dense) than liquid water — the opposite of all other substances. This allows for living things to exist in water! Ice floats while other solids sink in their own liquids.
Report Post »randerson503
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 1:19pmI believe in God as well, but your argument can also be used for natural evolution. In other words, those symmetries would have to exist for evolution to take place with a diversity of life forms. That is why I believe in guided evolution. If you believe God created the Heavens and Earth from nothing, then you must also believe he created the laws governing the universe: physics, chemistry, quantum mechanics, etc… It makes sense that to produce a living world out of the universe he created, he would use those same laws, hence evolution.
Not to mention that something had to have caused the “Big Bang” to happen. Who was behind that? Scientists cannot explain anything prior to the Big Bang. Nor can they explain how all of the matter in the universe can fit into a singularity. Those reflective thinkers think they have the answer, but until the question of First Cause is answered, everyone operates on faith.
Report Post »Rapunzel
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:09pm@Randerson503 – remember the Big Bang is itself a theory, and has many holes. There is an alternate cosmology that resolves many of the problems of the Big Bang, and conforms with the days of Genesis! Here is a link to the first of 3 articles explaining it. It’s pretty technical but the authors do a good job of making it understandable for the layman:
Report Post »http://www.icr.org/article/new-creationist-cosmology-no-time-at/
kickagrandma
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:37pmWithout a doubt. We “listen” to GOD speak to us through the HOLY SPIRIT. We “see” and “know” GOD in HIS creations, esp. in nature. We “breathe” in HIS presence daily without having to have proof that the process really works. We “accept” HIS healing in our lives and the “medicine” of HIS words. Seeing the wonders of HIS creation is enough.
I watched one night as a young man struggled with the argument, “What will others think of me?” He passed up a wonderful opportunity to meet GOD face to face instead settling for the approval of his friends, family and others watching him. Every now and then I think of him and wonder where he is in his faith journey. I’ve also see others blatantly turn their backs on obvious miracles done just for them by our loving GOD so that they would believe.
“Intuitives” are tuned into GOD….not that we don’t turn our backs and stumble and fall, too. But, our hearts and souls seem a bit more malleable than the “Sauls”. This doesn’t mean we are better, just perhaps that we are more ready.
Report Post »trolltrainer
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:57pmThe Pharisees saw but could not believe because it interfered with their preconceived ideas. This study only tries to find an excuse for their own blindness. Bottom line, believers are ignorant non-believers are intelligent. It is to their own peril.
God bless.
Report Post »joe1234
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 3:19pmromans 9:
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[f]
16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
Report Post »rdietz7
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:35pmUse the force
Report Post »red_white_blue2
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:35pmYou want to find out for sure…wait for death…then you’ll know for sure..My belief is firm that their is a God…oh, and if you meet him..try to come back to tell the rest of us.
Report Post »Rapunzel
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 10:13pmReminds me of the joke…A little girl was talking to her teacher about whales. The teacher said it was physically impossible for a whale to swallow a human because even though it was a very large mammal its throat was very small. The little girl argued that in the Bible story Jonah was swallowed by a whale. Irritated, the teacher repeated that a whale could not swallow a human; it was physically impossible. The little girl then said, ‘Okay, when I get to heaven I will ask Jonah’. The teacher asked, ‘What if Jonah went to hell?’ The little girl paused for a moment and replied, ‘Well, then you ask him’.
Report Post »hi
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:34pmMatt 22:37 Love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with al of your soul, and with all of your MIND.
God wants us to use our intelligence to know him. The discovery of DNA should be proof of a God. DNA randomly assembling into a human is like saying we could randomly imput letters together and eventually come out with the book War and Peace.
When I started reading books like The Case for Christ/Storobel, and Copelling Evidence for the Flood by MIT grad Walt Brown, it lifted my faith to a higher level.
The Bible says to be able to have an answer as to why you believe. The heavens declare His glory.
Report Post »hi
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:36pmI meant proteins randomly assembling into human DNA is like….
Report Post »Countrygirl1362
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:30pmLet me guess these researchers are being paid with taxpayer grants?
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on September 22, 2011 at 12:26pmBiggest. Can. Of. Worms. Ever.
Report Post »