Why do atheistic bigots perpetuate the idea that they are intellectually superior to Christians?
46 comments
Where does sheep chasers Archimedes & Euclid fit in this delusion? What about those turrists who discovered the convenient use of zero? Both around 2nd century BC.
Oh and which religion was it who arrested Galileo for proving the sun was the center of our solar system?
Haha, yet fundies today deny some of newton's other work (gravity)George Lemaitre's (a priest's) theory of The Big Bang (oh noes, he was catholic, that's not Christian!!11!), and anything else a devout Christian may have done that they're too stupid to accept above the word of the bible. Retards.
I find it's mostly that Fundie Christians demonstrate the idea that they're intellectually inferior.
Which is true. Not all Christians are stupid, but if I'm going to label someone a Fundie, they are, so....
"Why do atheistic bigots perpetuate the idea that they are intellectually superior to Christians? "
Because of Supersport, Lone Wolf, AV1611VET, and and the inhabitants of rapture retards.
Isaac Newton was into alchemy, which was basically the precursor of modern new age mysticism. Not very Christian at least by your standards.
Also, back then we didn't know as much as we know now, so it was easier to believe that Christianity made sense and harder to come up with alternate ideas about how things work. Today, almost all top scientists are atheists, at least in the US and Canada.
And the fact that some smart people are Christian doesn't prove anything.
The fact is science has its roots in Christian culture.
Yes, as long as its findings were convenient to Christianity. As soon as the scientific method started bringing up data that threw Christianity into question, you distanced yourselves from it as much as possible - which pretty much negates the whole "Christianity owns science" thing that you seem to be going for here.
*cough*Einstein*coughcough*
Religious affiliation =/= level of intelligence. That is, despite what those retarded "atheists" say at Y!A, you can be intelligent and inquisitive so long as you're open-minded and willing to dig deep for knowledge.
Of course, it doesn't hurt to be willing to question pre-existing beliefs...
These scientists worked in a Christian culture because, in Europe, that's all there was. And their accomplishments were their own. They were not supported by Christianity, whose policy was generally to fight any advance in human knowledge -- from anatomy to heliocentrism -- like a rabid dog.
Isaac Newton (Calculus), Robert Boyle (Chemistry), Michael Faraday (Electro magnetics), Blaise Pascal (Hydrostatics).
What about Darwin (Biology)?. He was a christian too. Or don't his discoveries count because you don't like them?
I'm sure Newton and Kepler, Christians though they were, would have thought Dennis C. was a dumbfuck, too.
"Modern Science was born in Christian Culture...."
It's further my understanding that Christianity (or perhaps religion in general) has kept scientific advancement back by about 1000 years.
If I am wrong on either account, I welcome the opportunity to be corrected (just don't be a dick about it).
@Ken1971: The Middle East had more knowledge than Europe, but I believe that's more of a matter of retaining more of what the Greeks and Romans had (which was quite impressive) than Europe did. They made some discoveries and inventions, of course, but in that they weren't dramatically ahead of Europe. The Dark Ages weren't nearly as dark as some people think (and the High Middle Ages not at all...there were quite a few innovations in technology, though admittedly many/most of them were military).
I don't think the loss of knowledge can be blamed on religion - if anything, Islamic scholars and Christian monks helped copy what little survived the fall of Rome. That fall was the true disaster to knowledge, mostly caused by a top-heavy civilization which even Diocletian and Constantine's reforms couldn't give the vitality necessary to stand up to the barbarians.
I have no idea if the Germanic and Frankish barbarians were Christian at this point; they could have been. (They definitely were once they were established in Rome, but they also took up lots of other forms and titles, etc. from the old order.P
Newton was an Arminian (not to be confused with "Armenian," Cher's ethnicity), a belief which denied the Trinity, and eventually morphed into Unitarianism.
Wasn't Pascal Catholic?
The fact is science has its roots in Christian culture.These were all outstanding pioneers in science and mathematics and YES DEVOUT CHRISTIANS: Issaac Newton (Calculus), Robert Boyle (Chemistry), Michael Faraday (Electro magnetics), Blaise Pascal (Hydrostatics).
And let's not forget Dr. Clayton Forrester (Hypno-Helio-Static-Stasis)
Which doesn't prove that science is Christian; what it proves is that there are some Christians who think that study of the world around them brings them closer to God, and other Christians who think that somehow God didn't intend for us to actually use our reasoning abilities and all that evidence is just there to trick us.
But to say that science is somehow a Christian-only concept just because many major scientists were Christians? Newton wouldn't have gotten very far if it weren't for the work of Persian, Indian and Chinese mathematicians before him.
I do think some of the *responses* there are also dumb. Anyone who thinks income levels are a measure of intellectual superiority needs to hang out with some bona fide geniuses at some point. They don't tend to gravitate towards high-income careers.
Also, Gloob: He wasn't an Arminian. Or he may have been, but so are most Methodists. I think the word you want is Arian. :)
Yeah, they believed in your cosmic sky-friend. It was pretty socially unacceptable not to in those days anyway.
And I've long held the opinion that Pascal should`ve stuck to fluid mechanics, and not come out with that stupid wager these nutters always come out with.
Faraday may have believed in a higher power (not necessarialy a bad thing, as apparently this is what kept him from doing research on chemical weapons). But anyway, it is of no importance whatsoever to me what these people believe anyway. Faraday's beliefs had nothing to do with his contributions to electrochemistry and electromagnetism, just as Pascal probably wasn't thinking about semitic fairy tales when he was experimenting with gases.
And Tesla was terrified of spherical things. Doesn't make any of his inventions less useful or real.
The religion of a person doesn't mean their science is correct or incorrect, just the science itself. In other words, Christianity, in the least, had NOTHING to do with the advancement of science.
All the scientists you mentioned have one thing in common: when it came time to do the real science, they put their bibles aside and looked at the evidence. Contrast that with modern day creationists, like those of the "Discovery Institute." Their so-called scientists take an oath where they essentially vow to ignore any evidence that contradicts the bible.
It is the modern day Christian fanatics who pretentiously pretend to be scientists who have branded Christianity as intellectual suicide, not the "leftists" who point out their failings.
>>Why do atheistic bigots perpetuate the idea that they are intellectually superior to Christians?<<
Well, they don't necessary are. There are just as many stupid atheists. But even they are superior to every fundie out there.....
We don't, we just point to the evidence that we seem intellectually superior to religious fundamentalists .
Yes, we live in a Christian culture, and most people are more or less Christian. But, most people don't let their religion get in the way of evidence-based facts.
There are rightist atheists too, ya know.
Also to quote Dawkins
This, while not said by your examples, was how they approached their work. What they are known for is what they could show evidence for. Newton also studied Alchemic beliefs and Pascal created a failed wager you lot think works.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
