The First STW Religion Poll

A VERY rough tally would look something like this:

1 : 11
2 : 3
2.5 : 1
3 : 15
4 : 33
4.5 : 11
5 : 24

is that 2 billion, 2 billion that signed up and committed of their own choice after reaching the age of majority in their culture?
or 2 billion that were signed up by their parents?

It’d be interesting also to see how many of those were really a 2 or a 3 on the SaxonRider Piousness Scale.

They’re kinda the ones I don’t really understand, TBH. I mean, surely, if you really believed in a god, like really actually believed, then you’d be doing all you could to get in his / her / its good books. If you’re a “non-practising Christian” then aren’t you at best really an agnostic?

4

I make that 15% believers (using 1, 2 and 2.5 as believers, 3, 4, 4.5 and 5 as unbelievers), which is about half the pretty consistent 33% for the UK.

Although, that’s probably about right, given that STW is skewed towards the young(er), maler portion of the population who are less likely to believe?

Just for the record, Adam and Eve were not Jewish. The people weren’t known as Jews until around about the time of Moses.

4

Looks like the STW demographic is skewed towards atheist pro-Europeans.

Anyway – Adam and Eve. The way I see it, if God actually visited I would be inclined to believe in him too. Or I might just see it as a Derren Brown prank.

Just for the record, Adam and Eve were not Jewish.

Were they christians then?

1 : n=11 or 11.22%
2 : n=3 or 3.06%
2.5 : n=1 or 1.11%
3 : n=15 or 15.31%
4 : n=33 or 33.67%
4.5 : n=11 or 11.22%
5 : n=24 or 24.49%

Were they Christians then?

They weren’t of any religion, they were just God’s people.

5

princehuggy – hadnt realsied the start of the point was cougar being a cheeky scamp, please disregard

5 for me…

I have beautiful twin girls born through IVF yet in the eyes of certain religions it is totally immoral and we should have just accepted a life without children and “got on with it”.

Appreciate that isn’t the case with them all and sorry if it makes me sound like a bigot.

I’m talking about the hundreds of responses in threads like these, where the religious have sought to convince the atheists that they are wrong

Where??!!

Piousness

Piety

Are you fishing Cougar?

More trying to demonstrate that 87% of facts can be backed up by statistics.

I have beautiful twin girls born through IVF yet in the eyes of certain religions it is totally immoral and we should have just accepted a life without children and “got on with it”.

And the counterpoint there is that many those same people would have you believe that the point of life and union is to reproduce (oft trotted out as an excuse reason for being against gay marriage). So not only would you be childless but you will have failed as a human being, and I should go and get my marriage annulled also.

It’d be interesting also to see how many of those were really a 2 or a 3 on the SaxonRider Piousness Scale.

ROFL

They’re kinda the ones I don’t really understand, TBH. I mean, surely, if you really believed in a god, like really actually believed, then you’d be doing all you could to get in his / her / its good books. If you’re a “non-practising Christian” then aren’t you at best really an agnostic?

Depends on definition of “practising” doesn’t it. Not that hard to understand when you think about it.

You don’t believe that people “really actually believe(d)” do you, cougs?

Where??!!

Ignore* mol, you are being wound up.

Piety

Ah, STW, native home of the higher-functioning pedant.

I suspect the nice, decent people on this thread would be nice, decent people with or without religion. Likewise the dicks in the wider world would find ways of being dicks with or without it, too. These threads always end up making atheists look a bit mean; but that’s because in this environment, the religious are the underdogs. Generally, rational thought and evidence are the weapons of discourse, and they don’t have any. So it always seems a bit one sided. This makes claiming sympathy easy for the religious, and makes it easy to paint the atheists, militant or otherwise, as a bit mean. It’s a weird reversal of what has historically always been the other way around.

5

Hadn’t realised the start of the point was cougar being a cheeky scamp, please disregard.

Disregarded, as requested.

Where??!!

I think he’s referring to the world outside of STW (there is one ya know 😆 )

Ah, STW, native home of the higher-functioning pedant.

I’d imagine that’s all forums 😀

4

Depends on definition of “practising” doesn’t it. Not that hard to understand when you think about it.

Perhaps. Dunno, I’m not the one defining it.

You don’t believe that people “really actually believe(d)” do you, cougs?

I’m sure plenty do. I’m sure plenty others claim to but don’t really bother, and still others tick the box that says ‘Christian’ on the census forms when they have as much piety as your average shoebox.

What I don’t really understand is how folk can believe that there is a god and heaven and hell and all that jazz, and yet not bother to attend mass / worship / pray etc. Aren’t they fearful for their soul when they die? What happens when they meet god in the afterlife and have to explain why they believed in him but did nothing about it? At least as an atheist I’ve got the excuse that I didn’t realise; if I was a believer I’d be down at the Church every Sunday with bells on.

Or is it that some folk just don’t care about the longer term, like smokers who know they’re probably doing to die prematurely of lung cancer but carry on puffing away?

Generally, rational thought and evidence are the weapons of discourse, and they don’t have any.

Well they do, it’s just a little more abstract than the others are prepared to deal with. Which is fine – there’s no need to be a dick about it – this is not a fight you need to win!

Incidentally,

http://the-difference-between.com/piousness/piety

piety (n):
(uncountable) reverence and devotion to God

piousness (n):
The condition of being pious; piety

I’m no nearer, though I appreciate that’s probably not the greatest of websites. Would someone like to explain the difference?

You have to be in a state of piousness to have piety *Wibble* 😕

Sorry, I think I’ve made it worse.

Cougar – trust me… you don’t meet anyone, see any bright lights are any of the other bollocks that gets spouted about.

It just hurts.
A LOT!
Then it doesn’t.
Then it does again – but thats a whole other thread

What I don’t really understand is how folk can believe that there is a god and heaven and hell and all that jazz, and yet not bother to attend mass / worship / pray etc. Aren’t they fearful for their soul when they die? What happens when they meet god in the afterlife and have to explain why they believed in him but did nothing about it? At least as an atheist I’ve got the excuse that I didn’t realise; if I was a believer I’d be down at the Church every Sunday with bells on.

Attendance isn’t a condition for everlasting life. You just have to believe and ask for forgiveness.

Which makes non-preaching Christians really mean, if you think about it.

Perhaps. Dunno, I’m not the one defining it.

That’s odd, you clearly spend a lot of time thinking about this subject and used the term yourself (in its negative form ie non-practising)

I’m sure plenty do.

Of course they do – again not hard to take in, unless you are taking the proverbial

What I don’t really understand is how folk can believe that there is a god and heaven and hell and all that jazz, and yet not bother to attend mass / worship etc. Aren’t they fearful for their soul when they die? What happens when they meet god in the afterlife and have to explain why they believed in him but did nothing about it? At least as an atheist I’ve got the excuse that I didn’t realise; if I was a believer I’d be down at the Church every Sunday with bells on.

Perhaps they don’t enjoy organised worship, the liturgy, the formality of some church services. Ok the RCs make a point about going to mass but others don’t eg the Quakers have a faith rooted in Christianity but have a different approach to worship. Not hard to understand, when you take time to think about it 😉

What I don’t really understand is how folk can believe that there is a god and heaven and hell and all that jazz, and yet not bother to attend mass / worship / pray etc. Aren’t they fearful for their soul when they die?

I think it’s because people can have their own interpretations of what they are told. Just like scientists interpret the science differently. Or in fact anyone. You can like a band and go to all their gigs, or you can like a band and listen at home. But you still like the band.

molgrips – Member
I’m talking about the hundreds of responses in threads like these, where the religious have sought to convince the atheists that they are wrong
Where??!!

… In threads like these, many of which you have taken part in over the years.

For instance – the “hole that needed to be filled” argument, as just one example… I assume that you read that one.

Perchypanther said that he personally had a hole that needed to be filled. He said nothing about anyone else. He’s not tried to convince you of anything, in fact he’s explicitly said otherwise:

I have no wish or desire to impose my faith on anyone else.

“Just like scientists interpret the science differently.”

First I’ve heard of it. Example?

Excuse mol, woppit, he might have been side-tracked by photos of people with their heads up their arses

molgrips – Member
Perchypanther said that he personally had a hole that needed to be filled.

I took that to be his explanation for why he believed that a “god” existed. But without evidence. At least, that’s how it read to me. He claimed that the “god” existed because he believed it did.

“Just like scientists interpret the science differently.”

First I’ve heard of it. Example?

Good grief, man, science is a process of disagreement! Do some sodding googling, I’m at work!

I took that to be his explanation for why he believed that a “god” existed. But without evidence. At least, that’s how it read to me. He claimed that the “god” existed because he believed it did.

No, he’s telling you why he believes in God. He admits it’s irrational, it’s personal, and explicitly says he’s not trying to convert anyone at all.

“teamhurtmore – Member
Excuse mol, woppit, he might have been side-tracked by photos of people with their heads up their arses”

It’s easily done.

True – who needs sensible debate, eh?

“Good grief, man, science is a process of disagreement! Do some sodding googling, I’m at work!”

A process at the end of which, is a generally-accepted theory, no? I mean, yes?

Cougar – trust me… you don’t meet anyone, see any bright lights are any of the other stuff that gets spouted about.

It just hurts.
A LOT!
Then it doesn’t.
Agreed.

Attendance isn’t a condition for everlasting life.

It is actually. Faith without works is dead.

Attendance isn’t a condition for everlasting life.

It is actually. Faith without works is dead.[/quote]

attendance = works?