By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
KLAMarine on 07 January 2016
Edit Thread
Aura7541 said:
KLAMarine said:
Aura7541 said:

It's not a claim. You have objectively made a counterposition. If you can't remember what it was, then that's on you. I'm not obligated to do the legwork for you so do your part.

You made reference to a counterposition, not me. You even implied it was a counterposition which lacked empirical evidence in support:

Aura7541 said:

Meanwhile, there has been no empirical evidence that supports your counterposition

So? Is pointing out the counterposition YOU made reference to too much trouble?

You're not looking farther back enough... You really did forget, did you?

I might have. I'm only human and I can forget things. To add to the tragedy, the person who brought it up in the first place has refused to point it out to me. It would prove too mighty a task, I might as well ask that person to move mountains.

Aura7541 said:

Anyways, I have a counterargument to your counterargument :D

Ugh!

Aura7541 said:

Wouldn't protestant leaders be more religious than the average evalengelical since they are more inclined to actually study the Bible and practice their religion's customs? After all, they do want to set a good example to their followers and their followers wouldn't buy in if their leaders don't properly follow the religion. So by that logic, if Pew was to hold a study on all evalengical protestants, the percentage would likely be lower than 55%.

It's certainly possible but it's also possible that followers could be more religious than their leaders in other ways. A leader might hold mass twice a week but some among his followers might go three times a week to alternative churches and volunteer in soup kitchens as a result of their faith or teach sunday school.