Category Archives: Atheism

Talk-show host Stephen Colbert is probably best known for his attacks on President Trump, most-notably a foul-mouthed reference to the president that resulted in an FCC inquiry in May. That's why some are surprised to learn that he also talks a lot about faith on "The Late Show."

According to The Week,Colbert is dedicated to his Catholic faith, despite his use of off-color language and harsh criticism of many conservative points of view.

In 2007, he spoke with NPR's Terry Gross about God, theology of the afterlife and how he explains such concepts to his children.

His Comedy Central show, "The Colbert Report," regularly featured religion segments in which debated the divinity of Jesus with religious scholar, Bart Ehrman and discussed the pope with a Jesuit priest.

When he moved to CBS as host of the Late Show, he continued to talk about faith. In the first month he asked Oprah about her favorite Bible verses.

Other faith segments include his interview with Joel Osteen about the pastor's beliefs and a confrontation with atheist Bill Maher, where he tried to persuade him to accept Christ.

"The door is always open. Golden ticket, right before you," Colbert said. "All you have to do is humble yourself before the presence of the Lord and admit there are things greater than you in the universe that you do not understand. Take Pascal's wager. If you're wrong, you're an idiot. But if I'm right, you're going to hell."

When actor Andrew Garfield appeared on the show to promote the movie "Silence" about Jesuit missionaries in Japan, their talk turned to their beliefes about demons, angels, faith and doubt.

It was an exchange with comedian and atheist Ricky Gervais about the existence of God, however, that went viral, getting more than 3.5 million views on YouTube.

However, even when talking about religion Colbert can cross the line. A recent segment that demonstrates how some Catholic priests are using fidget spinners to explain the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity features a make-believe interview with God that could be interprested as blasphemous.

See more here:
Colbert Conundrum: The Liberal TV Host Tackles Atheism, the Trinity, and the Bible - CBN News

Are atheists, on average, smarter than everyone else?

It sounds unbearably smug and condescending even to ask the question this way. But whatever ones feelings about the matter, theres some evidence suggesting that this may be the case.

Belief in God correlates inversely with education level, as surveys have long shown. From high school to college to grad school, as you move up the rungs of educational attainment, people are more likely to be atheists, less likely to pray, less likely to say religion is important in their lives. Among those with the most prestigious academic credentials, such as members of the National Academy of Sciences, atheism is a supermajority position.

In this context, Id also mention the Flynn effect. To judge by IQ test scores, each new generation of humanity is a little smarter than the last. And in step with this trend, rates of nonbelief are rising both in America and throughout the world. Some studies also find a direct relationship between IQ scores and atheism.

To be sure, this is a correlation rather than an absolute rule. Its obviously not true that all intelligent people are atheists (because, to name one reason, smart people are better at rationalizing beliefs they acquired for other reasons). Nor are all unintelligent people religious believers (weve seen many counterexamples to that hypothesis, alas). Nevertheless, when you survey large numbers of people, the pattern is unmistakable.

This must be galling to religious apologists, especially those who aspire to be sophisticated and intellectual. It certainly bothers Regis Nicoll of Crisis magazine, who wrote a post attacking the claim that religious doubt is a sign of intelligence.

He begins with an accurate description of the evidence I already cited:

According to a 2017 Pew survey, belief in God is lower among college-educated individuals than among those having no college. Other polls have found that most scientists, including an overwhelming percentage of those in the National Academy of Science, deny the existence of God.

So, how does Nicoll deal with these inconvenient facts? He first attempts to define the problem out of existence, asserting that people who dont believe in God are by definition unintelligent:

Of course, that all depends on what one means by intelligence. In fact, as a friend of mine once quipped: Can a person who flunks the test to the most basic question in life (is there a God?) be considered intelligent? Right, because everything we know about the world, human nature, moral ethics, and lifes purpose hangs on what we believe about their source.

Obviously, this is an entirely circular argument. Whether its unintelligent to reject belief in God depends on whether that belief is true. But even leaving this point aside, it hasnt answered the question: Why does religious doubt correlate with everything else thats associated with greater intelligence, like IQ scores or educational attainment?

This is where most religious apologists segue into talking about the wisdom of the world and how God conceals himself from rational inquiry, only revealing his presence to those who approach the question in a spirit of credulous faith. To my mind, this is as good as a concession, because thats exactly what a false-belief peddler would have to say. It also begs the question of how a person is supposed to choose among the hundreds of incompatible religions that all make this claim.

However, Nicolls essay doesnt take this tack. Even though he raised the question, he seems to lose interest in answering it. Instead, he meanders off on a digression, arguing that atheism fails to account for a hospitable cosmos:

I went on to explain that these speculations grew out of the unsettling recognition that we inhabit a Goldilocks planet in which life teeters on the edge of non-existence. Scrambling to account for these just right conditions, desperate theorists trotted out the multiverse, an infinite manifold of universes that guarantees the existence of our hospitable home, and every conceivable (and inconceivable) one as well.

This is just the fine-tuning argument which Ive responded to at length. Religious apologists who make this argument assume that the physical constants of our universe were selected from among an enormous range of possible values and that only a tiny fraction of those would have led to intelligence. Both assumptions are indefensible given our present knowledge.

To quote myself from a previous post:

If we had known only the physical laws of our universe, we could hardly have predicted, from first principles alone, that it would contain life. We simply dont have the knowledge to proclaim with confidence what other interesting possibilities may be inherent in other sets of physical laws.

In fact, as Ive pointed out, the Earth is a tiny, fragile oasis in the midst of a vast, ancient and chaotic universe. This state of affairs fits better with atheism than it does with any theology that includes a benevolent creator specially interested in us. Its what youd expect to see in a cosmos where life came about by chance rather than as part of a grand design.

From this point on, Nicolls essay descends into plain old creationism. Its as if he was too tired to come up with any argument other than Kent Hovind-style toddler-playground ridicule even though Crisis is a Catholic publication, and evolution has a papal stamp of approval.

Indeed, with other concoctions like self-organization, emergence, memes, selfish genes, and macro-evolution to account for the encyclopedic information in the genome, the narrative of naturalism reads more like a Brothers Grimm tale than Newtons Principia Mathematica. Indeed, a frog-turned-prince story is no less a fairy tale by tweaking the timeframe from a bibbidi-bobbidi-boo instant to 150 million years.

I have to say that if I were Catholic and read this essay hoping for an answer to the question in its title, Id be disappointed. It does a good job presenting the problem, but rather than offering any solutions, it resorts to irrelevant pseudoscience and nyah nyah, sos your old man taunting. Its a tacit admission that he cant explain the atheism-education link.

Assuming this correlation holds up, what could explain it? I dont think its as insultingly simplistic as religion is a stupid belief for stupid people. But I do think that one aspect of intelligence is the ability to come up with the greatest number of possible explanations for the same set of facts.

A person whos not as adept at this will be less likely to doubt the received beliefs of their family or culture. However, a person who can come up with alternatives will be more likely to see religious beliefs for what they are a hypothesis about the world, one possibility out of many and to notice when they lack explanatory power, compared to the alternatives.

Go here to see the original:
Are Atheists Smarter than Theists? - Patheos (blog)

Share this story:

In my family, we are all atheists. But that changed recently when my brother went to college and found religion.

When my brother returned home from his first weeks at UC Berkeley, I was excited to hear about college. But when we sat down to eat, he closed his eyes, clasped his hands, and silently mouthed grace.

My jaw dropped in shock.

The first friends Cole made on campus belonged to a Southern Baptist church group, which is practically a 180 degree turn from atheism. Not long after, Cole converted.

When we learned about his conversion, we freaked out. Atheism is all weve ever known and been comfortable with. But my parents are trying to understand. They read those cheesy books about spirituality and even went to Easter church services. They want to understand this new part of his life. But its been hard for me to accept it.

Im not really afraid of the religion itself. I can make peace with Cole studying the Bible and going to church.

But Im afraid that his religion will pull him away from me. He now spends all his free time with his church friendsso much so that they feel culty and controlling. He refers to them as his second family. What if someday they become his only family? What if he replaces his real family with fellow believers? I want to hold onto the Cole of my childhood, the one that climbed trees and made puns with me, but maybe well never have the same bond that he has with his church friends. Im worried that our differences are too big to overcome.

Now Im trying to step back and let him make his own decisions. Im doing my best to remove his religion from the picture; hes not Cole the Southern Baptist, hes just Cole, my loving, funny, smart best friend. My connection to atheism may be strong, but hes my brother, and I cant just write him out of my life.

Go here to see the original:
My Brother, The Southern Baptist - Youth Radio

Atheism remains one of the most extreme taboos in Saudi Arabia. It is a red line that no one can cross. Atheists in Saudi Arabia have been suffering from imprisonment, maginalisation, slander, ostracisation and even execution. Atheists are considered terrorists. Efforts for normalisation between those who believe and those who dont remain bleak in the kingdom.

Despite constant warnings of Saudi religious authorities of the danger of atheism, many citizens in the kingdom are turning their backs on Islam. The Saudi dehumanizing strict laws in the name of Islam, easy access to information and mass communication are the primary driving forces pushing Saudis to leave religion. Unfortunately, those who explicitly do, find themselves harshly punished or forced to live dual lives.

Unfair Trials and Atheists

Just recently Saudi Arabia has sentenced another atheist to death for uploading a video renouncing Islam.

The man has been identified as Ahmad Al-Shamri, in his 20s, from the town of Hafar Al-Batin, a village located in Saudi Arabias eastern Province. In his video, Al-Shamri renounces Islam and makes disparaging remarks about the prophet Muhammad.

Saudi authorities first picked him up in 2014 after he uploaded a series of videos reflecting his views on social media, which led to him being charged with atheism and blasphemy.

While leaving Islam is punishable by death in Saudi Arabia, the countrys Supreme Court, ruled against Al-Shamri on 25 April 2017, effectively sending him to his death. Court proceedings could last for months but when it comes to blasphemy, atheism or homosexuality, the sentence is more likely to be known beforehand.

Riyadh introduced a series of laws in 2014 criminalizing those who spread atheist thought or question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion. According to the Amnesty International Global Report on death sentences and executions, Saudi Arabia has scored 154+ executions, in which death penalty was imposed after proceedings that did not meet international fair trial standards.

In January 2017, an unnamed Yemeni man living in Saudi Arabia reportedly was charged with apostasy and sentenced to 21 years in prison for insulting Islam on his Facebook page.

InNovember 2016, an Indian migrant worker, Shankar Ponnam, reportedly was sentenced to four months in prison and a fine of 1,195 for sharing a picture of the Hindu god Shiva sitting atop the Kaaba on Facebook.

In November 2015, Palestinian poet and artist Ashraf Fayadh was sentenced to death for apostasy for allegedly questioning religion and spreading atheist thought in his poetry. His sentence was reduced to eight years in prison and 800 lashes to be administered on 16 occasions.

In 2014, Raif Badawi was also convicted of blasphemy for creating a website dedicated to fostering debate on religion and politics. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1000 lashes.

In 2012, the journalist Hamza Kashgari was accused of blasphemy after he posted a string of tweets. He was captured in Malaysia and brought back to the kingdom. No further information about his case has surfaced since.

Atheists are Terrorists

In 2014, Saudi Arabia introduced a series of new laws in the form of royal decrees, which define atheists as terrorists. The new royal provisions define terrorism as calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which Saudi Arabia is based.

Conflating atheism and terrorism has become official in Saudi Arabia, by which nonbelievers who commit thought crimes are the same as violent terrorists.

Article 4 of the kingdoms laws on terrorism states: Anyone who aids [terrorist] organisations, groups, currents [of thought], associations, or parties, or demonstrates affiliation with them, or sympathy with them, or promotes them, or holds meetings under their umbrella, either inside or outside the kingdom; this includes participation in audio, written, or visual media; social media in its audio, written, or visual forms; internet websites; or circulating their contents in any form, or using slogans of these groups and currents [of thought], or any symbols which point to support or sympathy with them.

In a program named UpFront on Al Jazeera America, Saudi Ambassador to the UN, Abdallah Al-Mouallimi explains why advocating atheism in Saudi Arabia is considered a terrorist offence.

Al-Mouallimi says that atheists are deemed terrorists because we are a unique country.

We are the birthplace of Islam, he adds. We are the country that hosts the two holiest sites for Muslims in Mecca and Medina. We are the country that is based on Islamic principles and so forth. We are a country that is homogeneous in accepting Islam by the entire population. Any calls that challenge Islamic rule or Islamic ideology is considered subversive in Saudi Arabia and would be subversive and could lead to chaos.

If he [an atheist] was disbelieving in God, and keeping that to himself, and conducting himself, nobody would do anything or say anything about it. If he is going out in the public, and saying, I dont believe in God, thats subversive. He is inviting others to retaliate, Al-Mouallimi elaborates.

Counter Measures

President of the Centre for Middle East Studies in Riyadh, Anwar Al-Ashqi, does not see the authorities adoption of these laws as suppression of freedoms. While he believes that atheism, as an independent thought is positive, it may become negative and require legal accountability if it aims to transform the traditional nature of the Saudi society, which instigates communal strife and challenges religion. The state in this case, according to him, has the right to outlaw this type of atheism and declare it as an aspect of terrorism.

Similar to other Gulf States, Saudi Arabia perceives atheism as a threat that should be eliminated. Thus, there have been several conferences, trainings and workshops in recent years aimed at immunising society, especially the youth, against atheistic ideas. Saudi Arabia has established Yaqeen Centre at The Al-Madina University Department of the Study of Faith and Religions. Yaqeen Centre, which means certainty specializes in combating atheistic and non-religious tendencies. The centres vision is to achieve leadership in countering atheism and non-religiosity locally and globally. Activities of this centre remain unknown.

In October 2016, the Saudi Ministry of Education launched a government program called Immunity in schools to inoculate children against Westernisation, atheism, liberalism and secularism.

Atheists in the Kingdom?

In 2012, a poll by WIN-Gallup International (Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism) found that almost a quarter of people interviewed in Saudi Arabia described themselves as not religious and of those 5 to 9% declared themselves to be convinced atheists. Extrapolating that figure on a national scale suggests there are about 1.4 million atheists living in Saudi Arabia. This of course excludes all work migrants from different parts of the world, who might be already nonbelievers.

The percentage of people who believe they are convinced atheists is the highest in Saudi Arabia among all Arabic-speaking countries. This percentage is the highest in comparison to Arab countries, even those known for their secular leanings such as Tunisia and Lebanon.

However, these figures contradict the ones released by the Egyptian Fatwa observatory of Dar al-Iftaa Al-Missriyyah in 2014, in which only 174 atheists are thought to be living in Saudi Arabia. It remains mysterious how this number could be this accurate.

Scientifically speaking, there are no official figures about the number of atheists in Saudi Arabia because it is very difficult to conduct a research about such a sensitive topic. However, there are several pages for atheists sweeping the Internet such as Saudis without Religion, Spreading Atheism in Saudi, and Saudi Secular, which indicate that there are some atheist activities despite all restrictions. It is difficult to determine whether these pages operate from within the kingdom or from outside.

On Twitter, the most widely used site in Saudi Arabia, over 20,000 Saudis reacted to topics related to the spread of atheism in Saudi Arabia. Voices advocating the rights of atheists appeared only very rarely compared to the ones affirming demanding persecution of atheists in the kingdom.

It must be noted that most accounts in Saudi Arabia hide behind fake names to avoid prosecution. A Saudi young man, 28, has been sentenced to 10 years in prison, 2,000 lashes and 4,780 fine after being convicted of publishing more than 600 atheist tweets.

Many Saudis say the presence of atheists in Saudi Arabia is like any other country, but their number in the kingdom is negligible compared to millions of Saudis who are adherents of Islam as a religion and as a law applied by their state in the finest details of life.

Read more:
Taboo of Atheism in Saudi Arabia - International Policy Digest (press release) (blog)

Despite constant warnings issued by Saudi religious authorities about the dangers of atheism, which is, according to them, tantamount to not believing in God, many citizens in the kingdom are turning their backs on Islam. Among other things, perhaps what is primarily driving Saudis to abandon their religion is the countrys strict and dehumanising codex of Islamic law coupled with easy access to information and mass communication. Unfortunately, those who are open about their atheism find themselves harshly punished or forced to live double lives.

Just recently Saudi Arabia sentenced another atheist to death for uploading a video renouncing Islam. The man was identified as Ahmad Al-Shamri, in his 20s, from the town of Hafar Al-Batin, a village located in Saudi Arabias eastern province. In the video, Al-Shamri renounces Islam and makes disparaging remarks about the prophet Muhammad.

Saudi authorities first picked him up in 2014 after he uploaded a series of videos reflecting his views on social media, which led to him being charged with atheism and blasphemy.

With leaving Islam punishable by death in Saudi Arabia, the countrys Supreme Court, which ruled against Al-Shamri on 25 April 2017, has effectively already pronounced the death sentence. Although court proceedings dealing with blasphemy, atheism or homosexuality may last for months, the sentence is far more likely to be known in advance.

Riyadh introduced a series of laws in 2014 criminalising those who spread atheist thought or question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion. According to Amnesty International Global Report on death sentences and executions, Saudi Arabia has scored 154+ executions, in which the death penalty was imposed after proceedings that did not meet international fair trial standards. In January 2017, an unnamed Yemeni man living in Saudi Arabia was reportedly charged with apostasy and sentenced to 21 years in prison for insulting Islam on his Facebook page.

In November 2016, Indian migrant worker Shankar Ponnam reportedly was sentenced to four months in prison and a fine of 1,195 for sharing a picture of the Hindu god Shiva sitting atop the Kaaba on Facebook.

In November 2015, Palestinian poet and artist Ashraf Fayadh was sentenced to death for apostasy for allegedly questioning religion and spreading atheist thought in his poetry. His sentence was reduced to eight years in prison and 800 lashes to be administered on 16 occasions.

In 2014, Raif Badawi was also convicted of blasphemy for creating a website dedicated to fostering debate on religion and politics. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1000 lashes.

In 2012, the journalist Hamza Kashgari was accused of blasphemy after he posted a string of tweets. He was captured in Malaysia and brought back to the kingdom. No further information about his case has surfaced since.

Atheists are terrorists

In 2014, Saudi Arabia introduced a series of new laws in the form of royal decrees, which define atheists as terrorists. The new royal provisions define terrorism as calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which Saudi Arabia is based.

Conflating atheism and terrorism has become official in Saudi Arabia, by which non-believers who commit thought crimes are the same as violent terrorists.

Article 4 of the kingdoms laws on terrorism states: Anyone who aids [terrorist] organisations, groups, currents [of thought], associations, or parties, or demonstrates affiliation with them, or sympathy with them, or promotes them, or holds meetings under their umbrella, either inside or outside the kingdom; this includes participation in audio, written, or visual media; social media in its audio, written, or visual forms; internet websites; or circulating their contents in any form, or using slogans of these groups and currents [of thought], or any symbols which point to support or sympathy with them.

In a programme named UpFront on Al Jazeera America, Saudi Ambassador to the UN, Abdallah Al-Mouallimi explains why advocating atheism in Saudi Arabia is considered a terrorist offence.

Al-Mouallimi says that atheists are deemed terrorists in his country because in Saudi Arabia, we are a unique country.

We are the birthplace of Islam, he adds. We are the country that hosts the two holiest sites for Muslims in Mecca and Medina. We are the country that is based on Islamic principles and so forth. We are a country that is homogeneous in accepting Islam by the entire population. Any calls that challenge Islamic rule or Islamic ideology is considered subversive in Saudi Arabia and would be subversive and could lead to chaos.

If he [an atheist] was disbelieving in God, and keeping that to himself, and conducting himself, nobody would do anything or say anything about it. If he is going out in the public, and saying, I dont believe in God, thats subversive. He is inviting others to retaliate, Al-Mouallimi elaborates.

Countermeasures

The president of the Centre for Middle East Studies in Riyadh, Anwar Al-Ashqi, does not see the authorities adoption of these laws as a suppression of freedoms. While he believes that atheism as an independent thought is positive, it may become negative and require legal accountability if it aims to transform the traditional nature of the Saudi society, triggering communal strife and challenging the established religion. The state in this case, according to him, has the right to outlaw this type of atheism and declare it an aspect of terrorism.

Similar to other Gulf States, Saudi Arabia perceives atheism as a threat that needs to be eliminated. There have therefore been several conferences, trainings and workshops in recent years aimed at immunising society, especially the youth, against atheist ideas. Saudi Arabia has established the Yaqeen Centre at The Al-Madina University Department of the Study of Faith and Religions. Yaqeen Centre, which means certainty, specialises in combatting atheistic and non-religious tendencies. The centres vision is to achieve leadership in countering atheism and non-religiosity locally and globally. What this centre actually does remains unclear.

In October 2016, the Saudi Ministry of Education launched a government programme called Immunity in schools to inoculate children against Westernisation, atheism, liberalism and secularism.

Atheists in the Kingdom?

In 2012, a poll by WIN-Gallup International (Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism) found that almost a quarter of people interviewed in Saudi Arabia described themselves as not religious and of those 5 to 9% declared themselves to be convinced atheists. Extrapolating that figure on a national scale suggests there are about 1.4 million atheists living in Saudi Arabia. This of course excludes all work migrants from different parts of the world, who might already be non-believers.

Of all Arabic-speaking countries, even those known for their secular leanings such as Tunisia and Lebanon, the percentage of people who believe they are convinced atheists is the highest in Saudi Arabia.

However, these figures contradict the ones released by the Egyptian Fatwa observatory of Dar al-Iftaa Al-Missriyyah in 2014, in which only 174 atheists are thought to be living in Saudi Arabia. It remains a mystery how this number could be so accurate.

Scientifically speaking, there are no official figures about the number of atheists in Saudi Arabia because it is very difficult to conduct a research about such a sensitive topic. However, there are several pages for atheists sweeping the Internet such as Saudis without religion, Spreading atheism in Saudi, and Saudi secular, which indicate that there are some atheist activities despite all restrictions. It is difficult to determine whether these pages operate from within the kingdom or from outside.

On Twitter, the most widely used site in Saudi Arabia, over 20,000 Saudis reacted to topics related to the spread of atheism in Saudi Arabia. Voices advocating the rights of atheists appeared only very rarely compared to the ones affirming demanding persecution of atheists in the kingdom.

It must be noted that most accounts in Saudi Arabia hide behind fake names to avoid prosecution. A Saudi young man, 28, has been sentenced to 10 years in prison, 2,000 lashes and 4.780 fine after being convicted of publishing more than 600 atheist tweets.

Many Saudis say the presence of atheists in Saudi Arabia is like any other country, but their number in the kingdom is negligible compared to millions of Saudis who are adherents of Islam as a religion and as a law applied by their state in the finest details of life.

Hakim Khatib

mpc-journal.org/Qantara.de 2017

Continued here:
God's own country - Qantara.de

3 Jul 2017, 9:55 a.m.

Census data reveals the number of people identifying as members of traditional churches has declined.

Keep the faith: Reverend Nigel Fortescue, of St Peters Anglican Church, Campbelltown. Picture: Simon Bennett

Campbelltown has seen a spike in the number of atheists in the area whilethe number of those who identify as Catholic or Anglicanhas dropped off.

Figures in the census released last Tuesday show the number of Catholics and Anglicans in Campbelltown has decreased by 2434 and 6804respectivelyfrom 2011 to 2016.

The decline occurred even though the population grew by more than 11,000.

On the other side of the coin the number of atheists grew by almost 10,000 people.

Reverend Nigel Fortescue, of St Peters Anglican Church located on the corner of Cordeaux Steet and Moore Street in Campbelltown said the statistics showed people were consideringtheir faith more rather than just ticking the box without thinking.

I think people are now giving more thought to their religious belief, he said.

Previously people were baptised Anglican so they just ticked the Anglican box. Now they are thinking what do I believe?.

Congregation: St Peters Anglican Church, Campbelltown, parishoners Reverend Nigel Fortescue (centre). Picture: Simon Bennett

While the number of official Anglicans may have decreased, Reverend Fortescue didnt believe the number of those attending local churches had followed suit.

Churches throughout Campbelltown are holding their own in terms of the numbers growing, he said.

There are churches opening up and more people are coming into the church.

In our church dozens of (new) people have become Christians this year.

The head of the Catholic Diocese of Wollongong which encapsulatesMacarthur Bishop Peter Ingham, said the figures do not come as a surprise.

There is a disenchantment with organised religion and a growing interest in unorganised spirituality, he said.

These days, many people want belief without belonging and belonging without belief.

You've gotta have faith: Bishop Peter Ingham, the head of the Catholic Diocese of Wollongong. Picture: Robert Peet

Bishop Ingham said the busy nature of peopleslives had left little or no time for God.

He also said the Catholic Churchs involvement in theRoyal Commission into institutional child abusehad not helped in terms of parishioners.

Theres no denying that since the last census the reputation and moral standing of the church has taken a huge battering, and for good reason, with the revelations of the Royal Commission, he said.

And for many, this has been the last straw, and we have to acknowledge the truth of that and acknowledge that we are currently being rightly humbled.

Bishop Ingham said the figures served as a wake-up call.

Although it is not a popularity contest for us, we need to be committed more than ever to see these figures change, not so we can win in the next census, but because we want those around us to know the joy of the Christian life, he said.

More here:
Atheism on the rise as number of Catholics and Anglicans fall - Wollondilly Advertiser

Religious people are more tolerant of different viewpoints than atheists, according to researchers at a Catholic university.

A study of 788 people in the UK, France and Spain concluded that atheists and agnostics think of themselves as more open-minded than those with faith, but are are actually less tolerant to differing opinions and ideas.

Religious believers "seem to better perceive and integrate diverging perspectives", according to psychology researchers at the private Catholic University of Louvain (UCL), Belgium's largest French-speaking university.

Filip Uzarevic, who co-wrote the paper, said his message was that "closed-mindedness is not necessarily found only among the religious".

He told Psypost: "In our study, the relationship between religion and closed-mindedness depended on the specific aspect of closed-mindedness.

Somewhat surprisingly, when it came to subtly measured inclination to integrate views that were diverging and contrary to ones own perspectives, it was the religious who showed more openness."

Dr Uzarevic's paper, called "are atheists undogmatic?", states that "irreligion has become normative" in some Western countries.

He inspected three aspects of mental rigidity in 445 atheists and agnostics, 255 Christians, and a group of 37 Bhuddists, Muslims, and Jews.

The study claims that non-believers measured lower than religious people in "self-reported dogmatism", but were higher in "subtly-measured intolerance".

Dr Uzarevic said: "The idea started through noticing that, in public discourse, despite both the conservative/religious groups and liberal/secular groups showing strong animosity towards the opposite ideological side, somehow it was mostly the former who were often labeled as closed-minded.

Moreover, such view of the secular being more tolerant and open seemed to be dominant in the psychological literature.

The findings also said that the strength of a person's belief in either atheism or religion is directly correlated to how intolerant they are.

Link:
Atheists are less open-minded than religious people, study claims - The Independent

Wichita Eagle

Atheist group stops coach-led prayer at Kansas schools Wichita Eagle The Freedom From Religion Foundation, which describes itself as a voice for atheism, agnosticism and skepticism, sent a letter in mid-June to Cheylin USD 103 and Weskan Schools USD 242 saying it is illegal for public school coaches to lead their teams ...

More:
Atheist group stops coach-led prayer at Kansas schools - Wichita Eagle

New research has found what many conservatives have argued for years: Religious believers are more tolerant of differing viewpoints than atheists.

The study found that while atheists may like to think of themselves as more open-minded, theyre actually less tolerant of dissenting opinions than their religious counterparts.

The main message of the study is that closed-mindedness is not necessarily found only among the religious, Dr. Filip Uzarevic, a researcher at Catholic University of Louvain who co-authored the research, told PsyPost.

Uzarevicconfirmed thatthe religious and nonreligious each have their own particular targets of prejudice, but atheists and agnostics were generally less open todiffering opinions than Christians.

This contradicts long-standing findings of previous psychological research which found that the religious were more biased than atheists.

In our study, the relationship between religion and closed-mindedness depended on the specific aspect of closed-mindedness, Uzarevic said. Somewhat surprisingly, when it came to subtly measured inclination to integrate views that were diverging and contrary to ones own perspectives, it was the religious who showed more openness.

The study was based on 788 European adults, 445 of whom were either atheist or agnostic. The 255 of the remaining religious believers were of various Christian denominations, but the researchers also included 17 Muslims, 3 Jews and 17 Buddhists.

The idea started through noticing that, in public discourse, despite both the conservative/religious groups and liberal/secular groups showing strong animosity towards the opposite ideological side, somehow it was mostly the former who were often labeled as closed-minded, Uzarevic said. Moreover, such view of the secular being more tolerant and open seemed to be dominant in the psychological literature.

Uzarevic speculated that since the atheists in his study came from highly secularized and nonreligious Western Europe,they likely hadnt had a many opportunities to engage with religious believers, making them more intolerant.

Being interested in this topic, we started to discuss whether this is necessarily and always the case: Are the religious indeed generally more closed-minded, or would it perhaps be worthy of investigating the different aspects of closed-mindedness and their relationship with (non)religion, Uzarevic said.

Uzarevic also determined that strength of belief in either religion or atheism was directly correlated to how close-minded people were.

Follow Andrew on Twitter

Send tips toandrew@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact[emailprotected].

Go here to read the rest:
Science Finally Realizes Atheists Are More Close-Minded Than The Religious - The Daily Caller

My father-in-law is one of the fairest, most patient, and most virtuous people that I know. Hes always available to help out, his capacity for forgiveness is immense, and when hes unavailable its usually because hes caring for or teaching people in his community. Hes intellectual honest, and hes a profoundly decent human being. Hes also an atheist.

Hes part of the reason why I have respect for people in the atheist community, and why when I write about atheism I usually have positive things to say. I dont think its true that all atheists are fundamentally driven by selfishness, pride or immorality. Sometimes people are atheists because theyve been intellectual or morally scandalized by poor catechesis or by the bad behavior of those who represent the gospel. Others may just be like those laborers standing around in the marketplace who havent yet been called into the fields. Conversion, after all, is a grace that comes to us according to Gods timetable.

Ive found, though, that when I speak well of the atheist community people often believe that I must be one of them or very shortly about to join their ranks. Of course I cant guarantee that I will never lose my faith (nobody can), but an atheist Im definitely not.

I am a skeptic, and Ive been around for long enough to know that skepticism is a deep-seated personality trait that isnt going anywhere. Ive never been capable of the kind of faith that is comfortable and stable. I constantly question everything and Im always searching for better answers not just in order to be able to better answer other peoples doubts, but also in order to be able to answer my own. I have tremendous respect for those who are capable of simple childlike trust in God and in the Church. Im just not that kind of kid. For me, being like a little child means being like that 3-year-old who always has to ask a hundred-thousand whys.

This kind of skepticism does, I think, represent a kind of sincere fidelity to truth. Its a difficult form of fidelity, however, because Christianity is not simple, easy or clean. I dont just mean that in the sense that its complex, demanding and youll get dirty so you should gird up your loins and take up your cross. I mean that the beauty of the faith is constantly obscured by power games, superstition, simony, charlatanism and various other forms of self-serving vainglory. We dont receive a pristine doctrine, because the teaching that we receive is presented to us by sinful human beings. We receive the Body of Christ the Body of Truth scarred, broken, pierced and crucified.

Because religious truth is so often abused and misused, it can be tempting to just be done with it. For me, though, thats not really a live option. Basically, whenever I get to the point where I can no longer see God through all of the mirages and smokescreens that men have erected in order to make God into an instrument of human purposes, I have a crisis of faith. Usually, I decide that Im for sure leaving the Church. Often, I conclude that atheism is the only intellectually honest option.

Now, this is the point where I do something that I wouldnt do if I actually were an atheist. I go and talk to God about it. And God listens very patiently while I explain all of the reasons why I cant believe anymore. And we talk it through. And usually there are some jokes at my expense. And by the end of the conversation, I remember that ultimately religion is about forging a relationship with a Being who is my author, my creator, my lover and my friend. A Being who is infinitely greater than even the most beautiful human representations, and who can never be reduced to any simple human agenda. A Being who is both revealed and concealed in every molecule, every galaxy, every human heart, every word that is uttered, every inmost thought, and every grand historical movement. A God who is in all, with all, through all, for all, of all, beyond all, beneath all, and above all.

When it comes right down to it, this relationship is sufficiently real, sufficiently profound, and sufficiently important to me that Im not sure that Im actually capable of atheism. No matter how skeptical I may be, the fundamental claim that there is a God with whom it is possible to have a deep and life-giving relationship is one I find it impossible to deny. I just have way more first-hand experience of grace than I can easily explain away.

For me this is the bottom line. I know God. I love God. And having encountered Him, I cannot go back to being an atheist.

See the original post here:
Atheism vs Faith - Aleteia - Aleteia EN