Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258482 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#209095 Jan 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
The absence of preventable pain and suffering.
I still don't understand why a good god would need to build a hell, or why it would unleash a master demon on our universe that it rejected in heaven. Why not flood and drown it like it did mankind and most animal life - or whatever it takes to kill such a thing?
Also, giving us reason, a holy book full of errors, and a planet full of fossils is a little suspect.
<quoted text>
Which has the power to do something about that? I don't. I blame everybody that can right that wrong but won't, which has to include an omnipotent god. That's fair, isn't it?
Well my views aren't as mainstream so I probably can't answer the first part. I think man dies in hell. I think Genesis is metaphorical. And I think the devil is more of a force than an entity. Although I would have a hard time articulating the last statement. I see evil more than some thing that can't think. I believe evil often has purpose and targets. But I don't think there is some guy with a pitchfork. So I don't know how to explain it. Maybe like an infection of the soul would be the best way

As for the second part I agree with you in theory but I think you may be oversimplifying it. For example, someone might think the best way reduce crime is to enforce a 6pm martial law curfew. It stops a lot of wrongs. But at what cost?

I really can't think of a way God could prevent wrongs against others (for the most part anyway) without tampering with free will

Then you got another possible factor. I believe this life is a test. If this life was all there was and it was are only go around then I'd be more inclined to agree. But in the same way say patents being strict can piss a kid off yet when he gets older he appreciates that it built character and better prepared him for life, I think life being how it is better prepares us to become who we need to be so we can enter the next life

But I do get your logic obviously. And sometimes there is no reason to complicate things. If someone can stop bad things from happening then why not? But I just think this situation isn't as obvious

JMO

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#209096 Jan 29, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Bumblebees didn't exist until a scientist found one.
o.O
heh

I think they used to be stardust

:)

“LOL Really?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#209097 Jan 29, 2014
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>Was it the bumblebee I was thinking of? Humming bird maybe? I swear there was something that aerodynamically had no business being able to fly. I can't remember for the life if me. Maybe it was the bumblebee I was thinking of
Perhaps it was this creature.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/5078800...

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#209098 Jan 29, 2014
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
When referring to the Christian deities I do capitalize those specific names.
I think the ambiguity implied by the generic usage of the word "god" within trinitarian oriented Christian sects is insisted upon mainly because of the conflict found within biblical passages supporting the concept, and a thinly disguised attempt to marginalize - or invalidate - the nontrinitarian/other Christian sects.
Do I think it's a conscious attempt by you or others here on the thread? No.
Nevertheless, during a conversation with lightbeamrider and others over the years in which we discussed - at length and in depth - this subject, that is what happens.
To even talk about Christianity as not being a <trinitarian 3'n1(+1)> belief is blasphemous to some Christians.
I even suggested to lightbeamrider it might be easier for him to simply reply "BLASPHEMER!" to anything I pointed out, since that was essentially the basis of any rebuttal he offered.
I endeavored to utilize nothing but Christian sources during that particular discussion and "BLASPHEMY!" was still the easy and most common answer.
<quoted text>
The religion has varying beliefs, nontrinitarian, trinitarian, etc., and there are names for those deities within your deity Pantheon. I use them.
<quoted text> I couldn't begin to put a number to the amount of Christians that have insisted or insist the generic term "god" be used, and that it should be capitalized.
It's obviously something that many people within Christianity feel strongly about, and I notice mainly within the trinitarian variant.
I suggest when Christians speak of the Yahweh, the Jesus, the Holy Ghost or the Satan, they utilize those names in specific.
Then we know exactly which deity said what and which deity we're referring to.
Well, I admit I really would not have thought there would be much in the way of an explanation for why someone would think it implied as much as you seemed to think but that was a decent argument

I don't know how likely it is but I suppose I can't rule out the possibility. For me anyway it would be reading more into it than was there. I don't really care what other people, even within different sects or my own denomination. I mean I will debate stuff I don't agree with if it is being presented like fact as a criticism of my own beliefs. But I would never take a proactive approach to try to make a statement as to the trinity or to demean another faith or any other reason. For me it'd just a little tip of the cap basically. Just a small way to be respectful. But I get what you are saying
Golk dom

Ardsley, NY

#209099 Jan 29, 2014
Yep

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#209100 Jan 29, 2014
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>I find it amazing that people can believe anything without sufficient evidence, and for no good reason. I'm very comfortable in having scientific observable evidence for everything I believe in, and I'm sure your comfortable in your delusions, not sure why, but hey it works for you, unfortunately.
Meh

Think of it this way baboon,

If it weren't for us religious folk, you would have nothing to fixate on all day

:)

I do think it is quite telling though that anyone could end a sentence swing it works for with the word 'unfortunately' when my personal faith doesn't infringe on your life in the slightest

Someone would generally have to be fairly unhappy to take such a position with a stranger on the Internet whose life doesn't intersect with theirs in real life. Why would you find it unfortunate if my faith brings me comfort?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#209101 Jan 29, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps it was this creature.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/5078800...
Holy cramp, what was that thing? Some sort of aardvark, anteater, tree elephant?

That was freaky looking!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#209102 Jan 29, 2014
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>You might want to clarify this, it makes little or no sense whatsoever.
Your ignorance isn't a reflection of the information provided on the post. Please try not to confuse the two

John 1:12
But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,

If you believe in God you are a child of God

I don't mind clarifying for you. Just be sure to add "to me" at the end when you say something makes no sense

Tell ya what, to save time, I will know that's what you mean from here on out

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#209103 Jan 29, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not quite.
Defamation.
Well-known and very wealthy celebrities.
I'll help with the redistribution of that wealth.
Thought you worked with troubled juveniles!

And went other countries to teach law

Which was after you were a big time criminal defense attorney

Now you handle civil cases for celebrities?

I'm not saying you are lying its just...Hmm, can't really think of a way to end that sentence
Jim

London, UK

#209104 Jan 29, 2014
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>Your ignorance isn't a reflection of the information provided on the post. Please try not to confuse the two
John 1:12
But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
If you believe in God you are a child of God
I don't mind clarifying for you. Just be sure to add "to me" at the end when you say something makes no sense
Tell ya what, to save time, I will know that's what you mean from here on out
Everyone is a child of their parents - there's no such ting as god.

When you religious liars can mature and grow up and stop lying about a creature that you have no evidence for, you can be allowed back into civilised society.
Jim

London, UK

#209105 Jan 29, 2014
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>Meh
Think of it this way baboon,
If it weren't for us religious folk, you would have nothing to fixate on all day
:)
I do think it is quite telling though that anyone could end a sentence swing it works for with the word 'unfortunately' when my personal faith doesn't infringe on your life in the slightest
Someone would generally have to be fairly unhappy to take such a position with a stranger on the Internet whose life doesn't intersect with theirs in real life. Why would you find it unfortunate if my faith brings me comfort?
We're really not sure why so many creationists come to the atheism forum to sell us their ignorant cults.

It might be part of the mental illness of faith.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#209106 Jan 30, 2014
christINSANITY is EVIL wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know what the word REAL means,Porter boy?
tell us!
Real = Something different to that one's mental delusions. LOL

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#209107 Jan 30, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. Religious beliefs should have nothing to do with it.
It is like banning interracial or nonreligious marriages.
Keep religion out of the government, period.
Funny how it's mostly non-religious people who agree with SSM. Or at least have no problem with it.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#209108 Jan 30, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
I also have no problem with polygamous marriages.
I do. It's called Warren Jeffs.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#209109 Jan 30, 2014
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. you've never heard of Celestial Marriage you Frenchified, boring, egocentric, ninnyhammered, bankrupt, corpulent, rooster headed pig ??..
Sure I have. Wasn't it started by Joseph Smith, or Brigham Young?

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#209110 Jan 30, 2014
sweets2360 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have nothing against TV preachers if they ever did anything for the people they preach to except take their money. They sit in their mansions and live the life of a king, and for what? They wouldn't spit on you if you were dying of thirst.
I have always advocated that if someone wants to send money to a religious establishment, give it to your local church which may actually help you in time of a real need.
They ALWAYS have their hands out. I just went to a Xian website, as part of a research project I'm doing, and there was a big ad about all the money they're trying to raise.

If the Lord will provide...why should little me have to?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#209111 Jan 30, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
With all due respect to Riverside Redneck: A dog know what to do with evidence like a scent or a sound. Why don't you? What would we say about somebody that came to this place without religious indoctrination? If faith does this to a mind, does it not deserve to be considered a mental disease the way schizophrenia is? This degree of separation from native reasoning is simply neither normal nor healthy.
KiMare wrote:
What I don't understand, is how any reasonable person can equate the bent over taking it position to the missionary position. Just that one simple point makes this whole issue moot. There is nothing anyone can say to dismiss the power of that truth, which is why the response is always a personal attack.
Did you think that your response was related to the post you answered in any way other than serving as another example of the damaging effect of faith on a mind?

Plus, you seem pretty unimaginative and sexually constipated, whatever your gender preference.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#209112 Jan 30, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
I've seen it discussed on several blogs. It appears to be a real game, though perhaps not a serious one.
I'm not so sure.. most of the commentators familiar with the poster seem to think it is a video made to look like a game, in response to people who want to play it but can't find it anywhere. The poster's channel seems to have several videos featuring tongue in cheek humor and animation, as well as another video featuring a "game" that doesn't really appear to be a game.



I'm mostly disappointed it doesn't seem to be real, as it looks like it could be pretty hilarious. I haven't been able to find it anywhere, if it does exist, so if you manage to find it please share.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#209113 Jan 30, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>the only ones who can. People.
Which people?

You?

Your neighbour?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#209114 Jan 30, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>Oh? Seems most of the world disagreed with Hitler. And Hitler lost that argument.

Even a lot of Germans didn't agree with Hitler. They were just too afraid to speak out.

And what part of "don't harm others" do you not understand? Apparently not much.
Why is harming others a bad thing in atheism?

You have claimed a position but not supported it.

Why is it wrong for one strong entity to rule over a weaker entity, it seems you have abandoned evolution as a driver of morality as evolution cannot supply the position you appeal to.

If evolution were true, harming others could well be a good thing if it causes your progeny to survive.

You are contradicting your own stated worldview by insisting that harm is absolutely morally wrong.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Incognito4Ever 1,640,105
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 3 min Complaining 319,691
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 7 min Patriot AKA Bozo 11,792
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 8 min inland empire trojan 34,783
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Nov 9 Randy-From-Wooster 201,885
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... (Dec '14) Sep '17 Alice Meng 13
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Sep '17 Love 292
More from around the web