Comments on: Evangelicals more rational than non-evangelicals?

By: Claes

Claes — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:38:29 +0000

…a little ‘more’ “crazy”. …And well put SMD, bytheway.

By: Claes

Claes — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:30:33 +0000

When it all comes down to it beliving in a big common religion is the same as beliving dreams foretell the future. And in my oppinion a belive that “[...] creatures like Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster someday be discovered by science?” is less superstitios than beliving in an omnipotent god, allthough waybe a little less “crazy”.

By: Nancy Jane Moore

Nancy Jane Moore — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:05:42 +0000

Given that fundamentalist Christians take the Bible literally and reject evolution along with physics and geology, I fail to see why their belief system would be preferable to that of people who believe in astrology and ghosts. As Karen Armstrong points out in The Battle for God, fundamentalist Christians do not think in terms of metaphor and myth; they need for their truths to be literally true, not metaphorically true. Therefore, they refuse to “believe” in evolution, because it is important for them to believe the Bible is literally true.

I suspect the same difficulty with myth and metaphor underlies a lot of the urge toward pseudoscience. Perhaps both the fundamentalists and the new agers are looking for certainty in an uncertain world.

Personally, I’d argue for learning to live with uncertainty, but that seems to scare a lot of people.

By: Edward Willett

Edward Willett — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:19:31 +0000

Provided the survey was carried out properly, what difference does it make who commissioned it? Gallup did the actual survey.

By: brian t

brian t — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:35:54 +0000

From the Baylor University website you link to, the “About Baylor” page:
“Baylor University in Waco, Texas, is a private Baptist university, and a nationally ranked liberal arts institution.”
“Baylor students are a part of a Christian community of faith.”

What did you think they would say?