Humanist Group Claims Baylor Religion Survey Flawed

By Katherine T. Phan|Christian Post Reporter

E-mail
Print
RSS
digg Facebook Twitter Stumble Reddit del.ico.us Buzz Share
Text

"Moreover, one of the principal investigators of the Baylor surveys is Rodney Stark, described by Institute for Studies of Religion co-director Byron Johnson as, 'the nation’s most experienced researcher on religion, having conducted the first major surveys of American religion in the early 1960s while on staff of the Survey Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley. Since then, Dr. Stark has won numerous academic awards and his books have been translated into 13 foreign languages. He and the faculty of the Institute for Studies of Religion are nationally recognized for their superior scholarship and academic integrity.'"

Baylor scholars are also questioning Paul's credentials. According to Scoggins, none of the Baylor faculty has heard of Paul although they are well aware of the leading researchers in both religious studies and secular humanism/atheism.

This isn't the first time Paul has assailed against religion in one of his publications.

In 2005, Paul, a CSH speaker who has written a book on "theropod dinosaurs," drew attention for an article, published in the "Journal of Religion & Society," that suggested that belief in God is not only unnecessary for a morally and ethically healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems.

The article sought to make the case that nations with a higher commitment to Christianity experience more social pathologies such as "higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies," according to The Times in London.

The publication was dismissed by Canadian statistician Scott Gilbreath as "statistically invalid."

"Gregory Paul has published a study of social problems and religious faith; but he has no apparent expertise or qualifications in social science research so, predictably, said study is statistically invalid. Said study was published by a journal that apparently does not have high standards for articles it publishes, and it does not even know how to contact Mr Paul," wrote Gilbreath.

The 2008 Baylor Religion Survey, released in September 2008, was a follow-up to the landmark 2005 survey by the school's Institute for Studies of Religion that revealed a majority of Americans believe in God or a higher power.

The CSH report can be read here.

More details about The Baylor Religion Survey can be found at the Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion Web site.

Pages: 12

View article on single page

Next Story : Diverse Group to Advise Faith-Based Office

Most Popular

Viewed
Commented
Blogged

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.

Prophet »

Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:33 pm Agree: 1 Disagree: 0

There are many atheists who are such for intellectual reasons. They are true atheists. But I have read countless stories of people who were Christians once who "become atheists" after something bad happens in their life that they blame God for. They're not true atheists. They believe in God, otherwise they wouldn't blame God for the mishaps in their life. I hope this humanist group doesn't try to pad their numbers with such people.
Forgivensinner »

Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:18 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0

mt, while corny, one could conclude that God believes everyone believes in Him in some form or fashion since He has created us with the need to worship/ a hole needing to be filled. While some spend most of their lives seeking the wrong god(s) others seek and find the One and Only True God.
mtgburrell »

Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:06 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 1

"Speaking of atheists I saw a sign it read:

God doesn't believe in atheists, they do not exist."

Typically corny - an ineffective (to thinking types) - portable church sign message.

It has that "gotcha" mentality - full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing, really nothing at all worth considering.

Where in the world do all these churches get all these platitudes? There must be a Web site somewhere for uninspired, boilerplate catchy phrases.
tpique1 »

Thu Feb 05, 2009 11:52 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 0

When a humanist can scientifically prove that thier mind exists, then they can come and criticize religion.
Forgivensinner »

Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:56 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 0

Speaking of atheists I saw a sign it read:

God doesn't believe in atheists, they do not exist.
bossmanham »

Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:15 am Agree: 2 Disagree: 1

pvlman,

I love it when I get to point out someones blatant ignorance. First, people who claim to be Christians and are not following the teachings of Christ are not the best people to look at to get a good idea of what Christianity is about.

Second, the logical outworkings of atheism ends at genocide. Why not kill the weak? If there is no God, there is no reason not to. Hitler did it! So did Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, etc. They all used that reasoning to justify murder. But it flowed logically. It is illogical in Christianity, because Christ said to love your enemies.

Read something other than your dumb atheist web-sites.
pvlman »

Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:26 am Agree: 1 Disagree: 1

The begginning of near genocide and slavery came after the Christian grooms first came to this land and established colonies that were firmly based in a godly foundation. Doesn't say much about that Godly foundation, does it?
weekenderman »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:35 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0

"Godly heritage? Genocide of Native Americans and enslavement of Africans? How godly is that?"

Actually, John, those atrocities occurred long after the Christian grooms first came to this land and established colonies that were firmly based in a godly foundation. Check your history books again.
GoldenEagle »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:17 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0

I like your style, Sassy Granny!!
Phileo »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 2:51 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0

Arguing semantics such as this is a sure sign that God is not involved.
Sassy Granny »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:26 pm Agree: 4 Disagree: 0

Good question, Johnzon.

I wish I had a neatly packaged answer for you. I don't. God only knows our early history is wrought with all manner of wrongs & violence. I weep every time I read the book, "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee."

I cannot defend the indefensible, regardless of the perpetrators. What I can say is that many noble men & women did not give their hand to these vile acts - people like the early Quaker settlers, the Daniel Websters, most of the signatories of the Constitution, as well as craftors of our judicial system. Let's not forget that it was a Christ follower - Abraham Lincoln - that waged a fierce battle to end the horrible slave practices you reference.

A reading of William Federer's book, "America's God and Country", demonstrates the direct quotes, documents, letters, etc. that underscore Christianity's powerful impact on making America a better union.
johnzon »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:50 pm Agree: 2 Disagree: 1

Sassy Granny

<<America's history, roots and godly heritage.>>

Godly heritage? Genocide of Native Americans and enslavement of Africans? How godly is that?
GoldenEagle »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:18 pm Agree: 2 Disagree: 0

I agree with you, believer.The biggest threat to Christianity is Christians who say they believe one thing and then go out and live another thing.I can't count how many times I've heard someone say "if that's what it means to be a Christian, I want no part of it".Now I know that in some cases this is used as a "cop-out", but in some cases it is a legitimate concern.
Daniel Paul »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:05 pm Agree: 2 Disagree: 0

Actually, secular humanism is simply a sector of humanists. There are Judeao-humanists and the list goes one. In fact, let's take it out one step further:

secular:
1. of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests.
2. not pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to sacred ): secular music.
3. (of education, a school, etc.) concerned with nonreligious subjects.
4. (of members of the clergy) not belonging to a religious order; not bound by monastic vows (opposed to regular ).
5. occurring or celebrated once in an age or century: the secular games of Rome.
6. going on from age to age; continuing through long ages.
noun
7. a layperson.
8. one of the secular clergy.

As you can see a person can still be religious and secular. True Christianity is interested in eternal things. Wars do not fall into this category. It has been those who introduce humanism into Christianity which have caused many of the problem we have in the world today.

Quite frankly, I have bigger issues with "Christians" then I do with non-Christians. The Bible addresses those who are stuck in "all the constant squabbling that goes on among Christians " when it says:

Rev 3:15 'I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot.
Rev 3:16 'So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.

Just FYI, it is never just a squabble to defend the gospel. :D If more people lived by the true Gospel we would have more social problem solving and less squabbling. The Gospel is about changing lives.

Still, Jesus had a squabble or two with the religious leaders now didn't He....
Sassy Granny »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:58 am Agree: 3 Disagree: 3

If anyone's guilty of revisionist history-making, it's the secular humanist crowd - - and often from experts that are little more than commentators.

In the end, their position is not new or particulary compelling, much less convincing. There is but one worldview that changes lives (from the inside out), and that's the worldview that confesses Jesus as Lord (versus mortals). Flawed and fitfull though it is at times, it is still God's Plan A to "go into all the nations with the good news."

I have no problem with people that choose atheism. It's their God given right to so choose. But I do have a problem with them attempting to destruct America's history, roots and godly heritage. They hard-charge as if loud rants against the biblical worldview will render that worldview null and void.
mtgburrell »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:24 am Agree: 2 Disagree: 2

If secular humanism leads to a better world for more people - and is a distinct improvement over the religious wars that have continued for so long - I'm all for it. I think Jesus would be, too.

Why is "secular humanism" such a boogey-bear to so many? Gee whiz, it brought us the Renaissance, didn't it? I guess some of you folks might call that period a "falling away from faith." We all need to fall away from faiths that paralyze us with fear and prejudice, don't we? (Of course, many would put modern American evangelicalism in that category. In many instances, I would, too. It can do so much harm to people.)
believer »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 10:45 am Agree: 3 Disagree: 0

What's on the rise is complacency and apathy in the church and secular humanism in the world.
mtgburrell »

Wed Feb 04, 2009 10:15 am Agree: 2 Disagree: 2

Not sure I agree that "atheism" is what is on the rise....

What is on the rise, I think, is an ability to move beyond all the constant squabbling that goes on among Christians (and among other "sects," such as Sunni or Shiite; Mahayana or Hinayana and more). People like my children have no interest in "proving" their failth to anyone - especially quoting scripture to support their own position! "If you are happy with your religion, fine, but don't try to change mine," they might say. I believe they are on to something. One thing is for sure, they will never waste typing time (as you and I do) on a Web site like this one. (Which brings me to another point I have wondered about: CP - in the spirit of being "fair" - often, to me, seems to put out provocative articles, especially calculated to start the conservative Christians' fuses burning. Does anyone agree with me on that? Of course, it's good to promote discussion, but..... Was it Saw who wrote here, "Larry King is just boosting his ratings." Well, CP knows how to boost its own ratings, I think.)

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.

Comment on this story