Skip to comments.We're more likely to believe in the supernatural than God?:..(UK)
Posted on 03/27/2014 7:55:49 AM PDT by C19fan
If you believe in ghosts, panic when you break a mirror and would rather walk on to the road than under a ladder, you are not alone. In fact, Britons are more likely to have faith in the supernatural than in God, a survey has found. It showed more than half give credence to the supernatural and superstition compared with just 49 per cent who believe in God. Similarly, more people believe they have extraordinary powers such as a sixth sense than regularly go to church.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing they believe in anything"
Isn’t God by definition super natural?
Yes, Chesterton was very often spot on.
Beat me to it. I was going to suggest that we now have social-scientific confirmation of Chesterton’s dictum.
Or put another way: If you stand for nothing you fall for anything.
Yep ... some people are superstitious, spiritual, believe in ghosts, angels demons, space aliens, think that their own “minds” can create something out of nothing (in a tangible sense), think that they are “god” or free agents of the universe — but — find it impossible to believe that there is such a thing as our Creator God of the universe, as described in the Bible, who did what is described in Genesis and Exodus (and further on in the Bible).
In contrast, just 8 per cent attend a church or other place of worship at least once a week.
Even if this was a random poll, there is some self-selection in who stays on the line to answer the questions. Still, the results are disappointing for Christians, traditionaists and rationalists.
Makes sense. Ghosts and superstitions pronounce no moral judgement on people, nor do they require any self-denial. God expects more from us, and has provided His grace to make us better than we would be.
Correction: The 29, 25, 23% are percentages of 10% of the whole, but that is still more than 8% who are regular church-goers.
I am still exercising Thomas Jefferson’s axiom:
I go to one church, taking a blue denim covered TEV bible. The preacher berates me for having ‘such an abomination’.
I go to another church, carrying the RSV bible, the other preacher demanded I obtain, and am told by this one, ‘We don’t use that, here, but you may in your own home. We use ‘this’’.
I make a trip to a third church, and, yup, you guessed it, ‘wrong version again!’ This time, it was a gifted-by-the-preacher-himself NIV Study bible!
Maybe not to you, but to me, a bible is the same as a rose, (by another name it is still a bible). All three churches, supposedly of the same twig, of the same branch of Christianity, but reviled at any other “edition/version/rewriting” of the bible, than their own chosen one.
The U.K. has a long tradition of supernatural happenings, as well as the home to both the Druids and Celts, both folks that have kinships with the supernatural.
All this means, as one looking from the outside, if y’all can’t agree on the source of all the holy writ necessary to be a Christian, than, of course, folks are going to look elsewhere, and to other things!
Coming full circle.
Modernity, with classical predeterministic physics only allowed the physical material. To believe in anything else was anti-scientific and considered faith-based religious and to be shunned. As modernity fell, it opened up acceptance to again believe in something other than physical. Enter Post-modernity, with quantum physics, entanglement, non-locality. Is the wave function real or not, etc. etc.
Post modernity allows people to become spiritual again without having to feel shunned by the scientific community. But most will still not embrace the True One, but they have embraced Mother Gaia, occultism, etc. etc.
...Advancing naturalism (the belief that nature is all there is) produces both expected and unexpected effects. The Harris poll found that belief in Darwins theory of evolution increased to 47 percent, up from 42 percent in 2005.
...As a result, some will crow that Science is winning over superstition! But it isnt. Between 2005 and 2013, belief increased in
ghosts from 41% to 42%
UFOs from 35% to 36%
astrology stayed the same at 29%
witches decreased significantly from 31% to 26%
reincarnation increased from 21% to 24%
While the noted increases are small, we should expect declines nearly across the board instead, if the science wins thesis were correct. (The one exception is UFOs; as a sciencey belief, they correlate with naturalism despite lack of evidence.) Further, we would expect young people (1836) to reject ghosts and reincarnation more strongly than older people (68+) do.
And they don’t. On the contrary, younger folk believe in ghosts at 44% to seniors 24%. In UFOs at 36% to 30%. In astrology at 33% to 23%. In witches at 27% to 18%. And in reincarnation at 27% to 13%.
In short, naturalism offers liberation, not from the bonds of superstition but from the burden of rationality. And we must address the fact that increasing numbers of young people are embracing that liberation. More.
What is “supernatural” other than an arbitrary ascription for that which one cannot access tangibly by way of senses and reason? The word is applied on a case-by-case basis by both individual and corporate humanity.
In short, naturalism offers liberation, not from the bonds of superstition but from the burden of rationality. And we must address the fact that increasing numbers of young people are embracing that liberation.
I’ve been on this issue for quite some time now.
What I seeing advancing is what I call, “The Embrace of Uncertainty”.
Uncertainty is the root of what has been called Moral Relativism, Cultural Relativism, Gender Relativism and Political Correctness that are all part of an indoctrination occurring in our public schools, Government and Businesses.
At one point Naturalism was at least an effort to only consider what is known and/or could be known through Materialistic reductionism. Between the unsatisfying conclusions and an increasing trend in physics for unprovable concepts, I’m surprised the acceptance of the “Supernatural” isn’t greater.
The so-called advocates of “reason” or “Science” Vs. “Religion”, are embracing virtually anything that avoids a Creator or Religion. They embrace scientific models that posit a “Multi-Verse”, “String Theory” with 9 dimensions and Darwinian Evolution, all being unfalsifiable according to the same scientific standards they support. Go Figure.
It’s a high level display of the Human capacity for rationalization.
Anything but the certainty of Christianity.
They deny their very own nature while pursuing an explanation of their nature.
It’s sad that the term “reason” has been co-opted buy people that advance the most unscientific concepts imaginable.
“When does a Snake realize it is eating its own tail?”
I’ve posted this a number of times and think it is worth viewing more than once.
No Science, No Logic and No Morality: Atheism.
yes, logic would say if you believe in supernatural phenomenon, you’d have more reason to believe in God, as God is supernatural.
Brother, it sounds like were fighting the same battle. although, it is funny to imagine that in one of those 'infinite universes' - Richard Dawkins is a rabid, snake-handling creationist ; )
Thanks for that video I must admit that the atheist was a trooper and fairly honest about his beliefs (or lack of beliefs).
the naturalist believes that beneath every natural phenomenon there exists yet another natural phenomenon. If explanation by reference to an endless stack of large turtles is silly, then an explanation by reference to an endless stack of natural phenomena would be equally so. The naturalist's answer for the origin of life, therefore, is some natural phenomenon. (Which one is not particularly relevant.) When you ask them how that natural phenomenon came to be, their response boils down to: "It's natural phenomena all the way down!"_______
If you do not assume the law of non-contradiction, you have nothing to argue about. If you do not assume the principles of sound reason, you have nothing to argue with. If you do not assume libertarian free will, you have no one to argue against. If you do not assume morality to be an objective commodity, you have no reason to argue in the first place._______
- William J Murray
that if we would maintain the value of our highest beliefs and emotions, we must find for them a congruous origin. Beauty must be more than accident. The source of morality must be moral. The source of knowledge must be rational.
- Sir Arthur Balfour
The Atheist in the video was indeed honest. There were two or three opportunities for his antagonist to drill down, which would or could have caused his brain to explode with contradiction.
Before to long the scientific rationalist will need a whole new set of words to stand on.
The atheist in the video was/is a student at Cornell University. There is no doubt in my mind that his beliefs have been formed by William Provine. He can be found on youtube professing.
Provine’s philosophy boils down to a few things:
There is no Free will.
We are pre-programed to do what we do. Dawkins says the same.
This is and can be the only logical conclusion for the Darwinist.
Will Provine passed away not long ago.
The war is the long war against God. Nothing new here.
Dark History of Evolution-Henry Morris, Ph.D.
The final chapter in my Christian journey was that of the existence of Satan. This is a huge challenge.
“Can God exist without Satan?”
” Can God exist with Satan?”
“Where do satanic influences come from?”
“Are they satanic?”
“What is Satanic?”
“Are morals objective?”
I understand the concept of a “Satan” that attempts to convince people that he doesn’t exist.
On a side note. The HBO series, True Detectives, addressed this issue.
It’s all about our culture.
It’s all about a story that can be believed.
It’s acceptance of indifference and non-sense for one self.
“Ghosts crowd the young child’s fragile eggshell mind”
“Blood in the streets of the town of New Haven”
“Spades dance best from the hip”
“He’s rich, got a big car”
“This place has everything”
For what is worth, Jim Morrison literally told his audience that they are idiots, and they Cheered.
“Let me tell you about heartache and the loss of God”
“Wondering wondering in hopeless night”
“Out here in the perimeter there are no Stars”
“Out here, We is Stoned,”
Sarcasm lost in the face of a self/group desire for acceptance.
As for the existence of Satan and the creation of Hell.
Every choice implies at least two outcomes. You can choose to love God, or not.
We can choose to ‘go our own way’ if we believe that there is no God, and that all we have is this span of time on Earth.
In the end, if that’s the path you choose, no one making that choice should harbor any regrets.
Can I really “go my own way?”
Or am I bound by truth?
With No Regrets?
Step onto Solsbury Hill?
Should I let my guilt define me and others around me?
Or, should I go hardcore?
I may or may not be ready to engage you on this level.
I need to run out for more beers and smokes.
If you are prepared to defend your atheism, I’m prepared to undermine it.
It’s up to you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.