Survey finds American pepple are ignorant of religion

[Nathyn]

Despite being so religious in the western world, a survey found that Americans are also one of the most ignorant groups of people, with regards to religion:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/01/AR2007030102073.html

The United States is the most religious nation in the developed world, if religiosity is measured by belief in all things supernatural -- from God and the Virgin Birth to the humbler workings of angels and demons. Americans are also the most religiously ignorant people in the Western world. Fewer than half of us can identify Genesis as the first book of the Bible, and only one third know that Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount.These are just two of the depressing statistics in Stephen Prothero's provocative and timely Religious Literacy...

...According to polls conducted by the National Constitution Center, only one third of Americans can name even one of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. Is it any more startling that only one third can identify the preacher of the Sermon on the Mount?...

...A 2005 survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that nearly two-thirds of Americans endorse the simultaneous teaching of creationism and evolution in public schools. How can citizens know what creationism means, or make an informed decision about whether it belongs in classrooms, if fewer than half can identify Genesis? No doubt the same proportion of Americans think that Thomas Edison said, "Let there be light."Approximately 75 percent of adults, according to polls cited by Prothero, mistakenly believe the Bible teaches that "God helps those who help themselves." More than 10 percent think that Noah's wife was Joan of Arc. Only half can name even one of the four Gospels, and -- a finding that will surprise many -- evangelical Christians are only slightly more knowledgeable than their non-evangelical counterparts.


It is less surprising but more dangerous, given America's role in the world, that the public knows even less about Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism and Hinduism than it does about Christianity and Judaism....

[Darth Rotor]

Despite being so religious in the western world, a survey found that Americans are also one of the most ignorant groups of people, with regards to religion:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/01/AR2007030102073.html
Think about why this might be: more Americans approach their religion, their Faith, as something other than an academic exercise.

DR

[slingblade]

I don't have to know how my crutches are made, in order to hobble around on them. ;)

[YouBelieveWHAT?]

What?

Noah's wife wasn't called Joan?

Well, you learn something new every day......

What was she called - apart from Mrs Noah, I mean?

:) :) :) ;)

(Just in case you thought I was being serious.....)

YBW

[Chimera]

It would be interesting to see this kind of survey repeated with atheists vs. Christians. I'm thinking that atheists would, as a whole, know more about religion and the bible than Christians.

[Darat]

Think about why this might be: more Americans approach their religion, their Faith, as something other than an academic exercise.

DR

But surely you have to then ask what is this religion that they approach as something other than an academic exercise?

[Darth Rotor]

But surely you have to then ask what is this religion that they approach as something other than an academic exercise?
1. Do you have to study how to be British?

2. Why do you presume that the world "surely" looks through your lenses?

DR

[Darat]

1. Do you have to study how to be British?

2. Why do you presume that the world "surely" looks through your lenses?

DR

Is this meant to be an answer to my question? If so if you wish me to understand it you'll have to less cryptic as I just have no idea what you mean.

[brodski]

But surely you have to then ask what is this religion that they approach as something other than an academic exercise?
If someone is asked what they believe, they can never give a wrong answer, unless they lie.

In the same way a religious person can never be ignorant of tehri religion, even if their understanding of that religion deviates from the academic understanding of the official Dogma of that religion- if there is one.

For instance you may find some self identifying Christians who are ignorant of most of the Bible, except the bits which support their point of view- by one measure they could be called “ignorant of religion”, but that is not the case, the parts of the bible of which they are ignorant are not a major part of their religion, knowledge of those parts of the Bible is not important to their understanding of God or to their faith- and therefore do not “need” to be known about or understood.

[Darat]

If someone is asked what they believe, they can never give a wrong answer, unless they lie.

In the same way a religious person can never be ignorant of tehri religion, even if their understanding of that religion deviates from the academic understanding of the official Dogma of that religion- if there is one.

For instance you may find some self identifying Christians who are ignorant of most of the Bible, except the bits which support their point of view- by one measure they could be called “ignorant of religion”, but that is not the case, the parts of the bible of which they are ignorant are not a major part of their religion, knowledge of those parts of the Bible is not important to their understanding of God or to their faith- and therefore do not “need” to be known about or understood.

I understand all that and indeed have posted pretty much the same myself in the past but I do think (the poll) exposes the lack of commonality within groups that self-identify as being the same or very similar to other self-identified religions. In my opinion it's why people can say, for example, follow the "teachings" of someone like Sylvia Browne yet still consider themselves a "Christian" even though no theologian (religious or not) would consider the two compatible or being the same religion.

[hgc]

Think about why this might be: more Americans approach their religion, their Faith, as something other than an academic exercise.

DR


Even the most ethereal of faith is grounded in some knowledge. You have to at least know what you're faithful about. Sure, maybe a Christian doesn't have to be able to name all the gospels, or even one of them, to have Christian faith. But should a Christian know that Jesus died on the cross in order to atone for our sins? Should he know that Jesus rose from the dead? Should he know that Jesus' mommy was a virgin? Should he know her name? Should he be able to name some number of disciples? Should he know that there were disicples? Should he know the names of Pilate, John the Baptist, Mary Magdelene, Judas Iscariot, Barrabus? That Paul is Saul?

What's the baseline standard between really having faith and merely saying "I'm a Christian" without having any idea of what it means?

[money]

I don't have to know how my crutches are made, in order to hobble around on them. ;)

Very good point, Sling.

[Solus]

It would be interesting to see this kind of survey repeated with atheists vs. Christians. I'm thinking that atheists would, as a whole, know more about religion and the bible than Christians.

I'd be willing to go for that bet based on every person and christian I've ever met. It's pathetic that I'm more knowledgeable of the bible than those christians around me.

[MelBrooksfan]

More than 10 percent think that Noah's wife was Joan of Arc.

Oh, come on now. There's no way that's true..

[Ducky]

Oh, come on now. There's no way that's true..

Actually, that's totally believable. Most American's can't even name all 50 states in their(my/our) own country, but they can remember a bad joke in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.

And of course that was historically accurate...

[l0rca]

I think this is a failure of American education, not only in schools, but in how we publicly value education. It's hardly a wonder that ours is the same nation where reading a book can be considered "acting white," and "keeping it real" means "keeping it stupid." This is a failure from the government, media, corporations, and parents. It's brought about from the wars we fought in, and our mindless indulgence and escape into entertainment.

I've always been a reader of literature, lots of older stuff as well. Has anyone noticed, from the same comparisions, how different our older corporations seemed to be? How much responsibility and pride they took in their own integrity? What companies can say that of themselves now?

If something is not immediately practical in America, it seems to find itself ignored. For most religious Americans, it took plains flying into buildings for them to be able to point out on a map where their "holy land" is.

[Gregory]

I was all set to not care, but these statistics...

only one third know that Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount.

Only half can name even one of the four Gospels

What the hell, America? Darth Rotor, I agree with you about a lot of things, but when half the people in America can't name one of the four Gospels, I think it goes a little beyond "not thinking of your faith as an academic exercise."

I honestly, truthfully, and sincerely do not see how that gospels statistic is possible. Maybe we should be asking the usual questions here--exactly how were the questions worded, what was the population tested, and so forth.

[l0rca]

If your questions find positive answers, I'd offer an explanation to be the intellecually void lifestyle of Americans coupled with our anthropomorphic nature. Simply: Americans are dumb enough to believe in any old god, but dumber still not to care about discovering its nature.

[Seismosaurus]

I honestly, truthfully, and sincerely do not see how that gospels statistic is possible. Maybe we should be asking the usual questions here--exactly how were the questions worded, what was the population tested, and so forth.

I suspect that if you said "Name the four gospels", most people would struggle. But if you said "Complete this list - Matthew, Mark..." most everybody would say "Luke and John" without thinking.

[hgc]

I suspect that if you said "Name the four gospels", most people would struggle. But if you said "Complete this list - Matthew, Mark..." most everybody would say "Luke and John" without thinking.


Get religion! Become accustomed to frequently repeated sounds!

MatthewMarkLukeandJohn

AsItravelthroughthevalleyoftheshadowofdeath

PraiseAllah

Dountoothersasyouwouldhavethemdountoyou

[Jon.]

I honestly, truthfully, and sincerely do not see how that gospels statistic is possible. Maybe we should be asking the usual questions here--exactly how were the questions worded, what was the population tested, and so forth.

Yes, we certainly should. Has anybody here read the book? I have reserved it at my local library but it will likely be 6-8 weeks before I get it.

[CurtC]

... but when half the people in America can't name one of the four Gospels, I think it goes a little beyond "not thinking of your faith as an academic exercise."

I honestly, truthfully, and sincerely do not see how that gospels statistic is possible.
I can certainly believe that half the people are not familiar with the specific meaning of the words gospel and epistle.

So if you instead asked which four books of the Bible describe Jesus's life on Earth, I wonder what kind of answer you'd get. I'm sure it would still be a depressingly small portion that get it right.

ETA: I was at a party on Friday night (it was a birthday party for a five year old, which went until late in the evening with lots of alcohol for the adults), and at one point there were about eight of us sitting around the dinner table, and the two of us who are outspoken atheists started arguing about which of us knew the Bible better. I didn't really challenge him, so I don't know which of us it was, but I'm sure that each of us knew more about it than any other person in the room.

[skeptifem]

i would say christianity discourages learning about other religions for the most part... that is probably a huge part of this issue.

[slingblade]

i would say christianity discourages learning about other religions for the most part... that is probably a huge part of this issue.

They discouraged me. I got all kinds of hell for taking World Religions in high school. But before that, I remember hearing that we should ignore those false religions, because they could cause us to doubt our own faith.

:eye-poppi

[The Great Hairy One]

1. Do you have to study how to be British?


I don't know how it goes in British schools, but here in Australia we have classes on Australian history, culture, society and politics, which are mandatory for all children in all schools (it's part of the national education curriculum).

Cheers,
TGHO

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Psh. That's hilarious. But hardly surprising. I mean, many people associate with Christianity. But no one really reads the Bible. Church tends to be a chore. Even the most strict Catholic tells you to use safe sex. I mean, people in my class couldn't even decide what Jesus was exactly. The only thing in common was a belief in an afterlife. And most didn't even believe in Hell.

[strathmeyer]

I was hiking recently and I can assure everyone that half the people walking around in small towns do not know where their post office is. Ignorance isn't surprising anymore.

[MelBrooksfan]

Even the most strict Catholic tells you to use safe sex.


The new pope says no such thing. IIRC, Ratzinger's on the record as calling condoms unreliable. Or, at least, this (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JQP/is_380/ai_n14795734) source says as much. I'm unsure of it's reliability.

[c4ts]

I don't have to know how my crutches are made, in order to hobble around on them. ;)

Or hurl them at others who try to explain things...

[Tony]

In my experience, the people most ignorant of religion are the religious. It wasn't until I started actually reading the Bible that I started to fundamentally question it.

[brodski]

I don't know how it goes in British schools, but here in Australia we have classes on Australian history, culture, society and politics, which are mandatory for all children in all schools (it's part of the national education curriculum).

Cheers,
TGHO

Not here, you only need to “study how to be British” if you are applying to become a British Subject (or “citizen” in these PC times). There was a thread a while ago about one of our fellow forumites taking (and passing) this test.

[DangerousBeliefs]

This just in...

Fully half of Americans have below average intelligence.

Personally, I think for as much of a rep that we have here in the US as being a religious country, I think the vast silent majority are "arm chair" Christians... at best.

I'd love to ask Dubya (George Witless Bush) a few Bible questions...

[Mashuna]

If someone is asked what they believe, they can never give a wrong answer, unless they lie.

In the same way a religious person can never be ignorant of tehri religion, even if their understanding of that religion deviates from the academic understanding of the official Dogma of that religion- if there is one.

For instance you may find some self identifying Christians who are ignorant of most of the Bible, except the bits which support their point of view- by one measure they could be called “ignorant of religion”, but that is not the case, the parts of the bible of which they are ignorant are not a major part of their religion, knowledge of those parts of the Bible is not important to their understanding of God or to their faith- and therefore do not “need” to be known about or understood.

This is similar to the Glenn Hoddle model of Christianity, now with added reincarnation.

[kmortis]

Yes, we certainly should. Has anybody here read the book? I have reserved it at my local library but it will likely be 6-8 weeks before I get it.

I've read "Religious Illiteracy". Mama Mortis's pastor had a copy that I borrowed. The gospel question was phrased as "Name the Four Gospels". The survey didn't stop at Christianity, though. It tried to cover as many of the world's religions as it could in a 25 question survey. The prime focus was Christianity (IIRC, 16 of the 25 questions were about Christian topics: name the Gospels, the Ten Commandments, Match the person to the event etc).

I quite likes the book. He pointed out that it was the religiously liberal crowd that "dumbed down" America's religious literacy. Public schools used to use the Bible as a primer. Then, once Catholics started to become a political force to be reckoned with, the strictly Protestant curricula couldn't pass muster. Once the Jews were accepted, we became a Judeo-Christian society, thereby watering down religious education more. Now with the inclusion of Islam as the third in the "People of the Book" or "Abrahamic Religions", it's watered down still.

Now, understand, that's a summary of a medium sized book (IIRC, it's only 200-300 pages). Obviously, he develops the evidence more than I just did. That and he's a religious studies professor, and I'm a biomechanoid. :D

[brodski]

This is similar to the Glenn Hoddle model of Christianity, now with added reincarnation.

According to some sources this is more a "now with reinstated reincarnation".

[Mashuna]

According to some sources this is more a "now with reinstated reincarnation".

Well, it was an idea who's time had come. Again.

[brodski]

Well, it was an idea who's time had come. Again.

:D

[dglas]

Honestly, the diddly-pi$$ details are only interesting from the standpoint of determining (indirectly) if the individual's faith is an entirely internal affair or whether it has some external referent, however mutable (subject to interpretation). Now, this will be important from a couple of standpoints:

(1) from the perspective of the expert-claiming figure(s) who wants to establish him/her/themselves as the authority to be deferred to; and,

(2) from the perspective of those who advocate either private internal realms or public external realms as the foundation of knowledge (and/or faith).

Rather than get lost in trivia, however, it seems to me more to the point to deal directly with the dynamics and locutionary forces of the mindset, in particular the basic conceptions of self they build (a prime example being the Christian presumption that all humans are intrinsically evil).

The trivia, for the most part, is merely a buffer against critical examination, in my view, and that, as I'm sure most here have experienced, is precisely how "chapter & verse" apologists use it - as a wall off text unthinkingly wielded as a rhetorical ploy.

Being able to list who begat who is the equivalent of celebrity gossip, and is not the stuff of critical and meaningful understanding.

[l0rca]

This reminds me of my Confirmation, in the 4th or 6th or 7th grade, I can't remember. Anyway, Catholics believe that when you take this 'vow' by having ash or oil or something spread as a cross on your forehead during a special mass, the Holy Spirit jumps into your body, giving you seven different empowerments on your character -- courage, piety, honesty, etc.. And you're supposed to feel something when this happens. I was a pretty faithful kid, yeah yeah. But there was no special feeling. I felt I should be depressed, but I reasoned a sense of depression would insult the Holy Spirit, so I slowly convincesd myself that this seamless binding of myself with this special section of the trinity of God would incorporate itself in those characteristics without any sort of emotional draw. Of course I was -- through this reasoning -- ignoring the fact that piety was one of the characteristics that was at that moment noticeably stale -- I had no awe, no pious moment, just an intimate pressure put upon me by the church to fear my own true feelings of disappointment.

Later that night I prayed that the boogey man wouldn't get me. I said, Holy Spirit, protect me. And slept with the night light on.