Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 238467 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.

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172742 Jul 21, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
When wanting to debate or sway an atheist you will need to use testable, verifiable data not personal opinions and your habit of dodging questions and deliberately changing the subject when you are stumped, one of your favorites we see, only makes you look foolish.
I grew up in a friendly little baptist church. So your tactics are nothing new for me as the youth ministers and even boss man preacher would do the same thing. Avoid questions, give excises why they didn't want to answer them and change the subject.
You give yourself way too much credit and importance. What makes you think I would waste my time trying to convince you of anything? I keep telling you I'm not here to convince you or convert you. I've answered many of your questions. Just not in the way you want me to.

And here's a little special announcement just for YOU. Since you seem to be my biggest fan here,(cough)(yes that was sarcasm) I've decided that since you're so cocky and sure of yourself, you must already know everything. Uh-oh. That can mean only one thing. If you know everything, you must be GOD! You really do exist! Problem solved!! Then that means I don't have to answer your questions! You already know everything!:D

Mental checklist:

He just "knew" I was lying about the ten tests...

He just knew I wasn't answering him on his own terms so therefore my answers didn't count...

Yep!! You sure are omniscient!

LOL

Sarcasm was a free bonus, but until midnight only. Please have parents permission before ordering another package of ignorance.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#172747 Jul 21, 2013
atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
All that crap and all you will hear is "I never knew you". I'm so glad I don't share your burdens.
Just admit it, you want to validate your wickedness, your disobedience, your disgraceful life, and it's just not working out at all for you.
Knowledge is gained after having faith. Since you have no faith, you are left with no knowledge and you are very angry.
We all see that with your daily outbursts and lies.
You are in no way a person that needs to make any comments about knowledge.. you only share your hateful opinions. You are also in no way a person who should comment on anything about anger, and anyone who may hold it. You have accused so many of being angry, but yet you post things such as hoping someone would die in a fiery car crash...

Life on topix would be much more peaceful without your rantings and accusations and hatefulness.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#172748 Jul 21, 2013
atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
He gives me so much credit that he even changed his moniker because of me. I'm so proud that my faith has irritated him so much.
Yeah...oh how sweet to admit your love of being abhorrent. It's very disgusting... and you get off on it. Thanks for finally admitting it.

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172749 Jul 21, 2013
atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
All that crap and all you will hear is "I never knew you". I'm so glad I don't share your burdens.
Just admit it, you want to validate your wickedness, your disobedience, your disgraceful life, and it's just not working out at all for you.
Knowledge is gained after having faith. Since you have no faith, you are left with no knowledge and you are very angry.
We all see that with your daily outbursts and lies.
I am civil to those who are civil to me. Bob has been nothing but civil to me. Does he challenge me? Yes he does. Do I challenge him? He says I do and I have no reason to call him a liar. I'd like to ask you to lighten up on him. Most of the atheists here are reasonable even if we disagree.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#172750 Jul 21, 2013
atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
He gives me so much credit that he even changed his moniker because of me. I'm so proud that my faith has irritated him so much.
I'm sure your "god" has a special spot for you in heaven for spreading his "good" word lol

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172751 Jul 21, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a link from two websites that show that the word faith is synonymous with trust.
http://thesaurus.com/browse/faith...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/trus...
I am aware of the use of the word.

But make no mistake-- we are speaking of **religious** faith here.

In that meaning of the word, no atheist has any of that-- by definition.

So your attempt to deflect my points is not going to work.

I suppose I could have been more specific:

All **religious** faith is based on nothing.

If they had **facts** they would not need to depend on faith.

Would they?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172752 Jul 21, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
As for your question, I trust that God has announced Himself in a major way. I believe the evidence is more probable than not, that He did this through the person of Jesus Christ. Now here is where I'm sure we'll disagree.
The problem here? Once you go down the faith-road?

You are forever incapable of being objective about what comes next.

Thus,**all** of your subsequent perceptions are subjective to that faith.

And barring something that shakes your fundamental faith? You'll remain non-objective with respect to what you experience.

But.

Reality does not care if you believe or not.

And reality is what it is-- there seems to be zero facts backing the idea of a god.

In reality-- if you remove all the trappings of faith.

And there you have it.

Without your faith first? You have no evidence in support of any god.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172753 Jul 21, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
And I still don't understand what you mean by the "dodge of faith." Call me slow on that one. You'll have to explain what you mean a little more in detail.
Faith [religious] is not evidence--- it is always going to cloud the perceptions of anyone who has it.

But most religions attempt to get around the 100% lack of **objective** facts in support of their claims of god(s), by saying "faith-- you must have faith".

They are correct, of course--without faith, they have zip.

But **with** faith? The human mind is clouded by said faith, and will **create** whatever it needs to "justify" the faith.

In a lovely bit of boot-strapping.

The classic dodge is: "the bible is true because the bible says it is true".

Circular [non]reasoning is a logical fallacy.

Faith is the ultimate in circular reasoning.

That is what I mean by "dodge of faith".

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172754 Jul 21, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
Let me ask you a question. If God was to suddenly appear, leaving no question in the minds of humankind about his identity, what do you think the fear factor would be like?
That would depend on the god in question, wouldn't it?

Certainly if the monstrous god of the bible suddenly appeared?

Their fear would be quite **justified** the bible depicts a horrid god who delights in the suffering of people.

I conclude this, based on the activities the bible chronicles of this god:

1) it deliberately creates beings who it knows will fail-- they were created **to** fail -- but it punishes them for that inevitable failure anyhow-- with infinite torture.

2) it cannot manage to muster up enough mojo to forgive, unless something is killed first... wtf?

3) it seems to require constant adoration in it's subjects-- to the point they are near-mindless slaves to this requirement.

4) it takes pride in being jealous-- a very petty and evil emotion, really

5) it deliberately created an anti-god-- and deliberately and with malice, turns this anti-god loose on earth-- and deliberately grants this anti-god all the **real** power over people-- as if creating them with built-in fail was not enough

So yeah-- if the god of the bible suddenly appears?

People **should** be scared-- the bible's god is a monster.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172755 Jul 21, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
As for your question, I trust that God has announced Himself in a major way. I believe the evidence is more probable than not, that He did this through the person of Jesus Christ.
Of course.

That is your **faith** speaking-- not any facts you may or may not have.

Objectively? You have no facts at all-- until you engage your **faith**.

Then suddenly? You seem to have all the "facts" you want.

Amazing how that works....

... no?

But objectively, you are still left with no ...**actual** facts.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172756 Jul 21, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>True.
And yet the children are crippled.
And yet the children are crippled... yes. An unfortunate and unforeseen consequence.

... meh.

Why is it always the innocent children who bear the brunt of these things?

... and **that** is one of the major flaws with the god theory.

That **children** bear the brunt of adult human thoughtlessness.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172757 Jul 21, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Exactly. This doesn't even get into how much even on those first 4 centuries were changed around and edited once they did finally get penned.
If someone really thinks that the copy of the gospels people have in their bible today matches up with those ancient scrolls they are woefully mistaken. Even the scrolls vary from minor changes to entire paragraphs added or removed!
<quoted text>
Yep. And language analysis shows major inclusions and edits from one generational copy to the next..

... so much for his claim of "meticulous copy practice".

People don't change their stripes.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172758 Jul 21, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
What are the sources for determining lifespans? How do we know that 30 was the average? I would agree with this for the region of Judea before the Roman conquest. But after the Roman conquest? I'm quite sure that we could expect better medical treatment, a better water delivery and sanitation system for which Rome was famous and unrivaled in engineering, and given all of these factors, shouldn't we expect that the mortality rates would drop and life expectancies to increase in proportion?
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13...
http://www.odyeda.com/English/JewishTimeline....
*sigh*

30 is conservative, with pretty modern (as those things went) accouterments with regards to sanitation and so on.

In reality? The real world numbers were likely much lower-- what with the streets being synonymous with sewers, etc.

We moderns **know** the sorts of diseases people get under those conditions even today--**with** modern antibiotics.

Back then?.. meh. Anytime someone caught a cold/influenza? They **died**...

.. or if they got an infection-- like a simple bladder/kidney infection? Death was their outcome to a pretty high degree of certainty.

Even something as seemingly minor as a tooth infection? Dead by the middle 20's from the creeping infection spreading to the bones....

So yeah-- 30 is likely too generous here...

... is it any wonder they married at 11, 12 or 13? They **had** to... they'd most likely be dead by the 5th kid even then.

Of course, most of their kids died before 12... so 5 or more was kinda needed too.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172759 Jul 21, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
I am civil to those who are civil to me. Bob has been nothing but civil to me. Does he challenge me? Yes he does. Do I challenge him? He says I do and I have no reason to call him a liar. I'd like to ask you to lighten up on him. Most of the atheists here are reasonable even if we disagree.
:)

The very first post "atheism is evil" posted to me?

Was one so full of his seething hate, that I literally laughed out loud-- I thought he was joking... a bit of over-the-top sarcasm.

Alas, he wasn't joking...

... meh.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172760 Jul 21, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure your "god" has a special spot for you in heaven for spreading his "good" word lol
He's proof enough for anyone, that there can not possibly be a **good** god who gives a crap.

What sort of god would suffer the likes of "atheism is evil" to continue to sully it's good name?

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#172761 Jul 21, 2013
Astra wrote:
<quoted text>
Thats just your opinion! Atheism and free speech is not compatible. Tough luck you live in a democracy.
It's a fact that blog is full of lies from religios liars

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#172762 Jul 21, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet the children are crippled... yes. An unfortunate and unforeseen consequence.
... meh.
Why is it always the innocent children who bear the brunt of these things?
... and **that** is one of the major flaws with the god theory.
That **children** bear the brunt of adult human thoughtlessness.
Yes.

There's something fatally wrong with the underlying notions.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#172763 Jul 22, 2013
My that was sad, he actually resort to stealing what I said and slightly rewording it.

Smh.

Not only has he failed to answer any questions he now can't even make up his own criticisms. How pathetic.

My this was a long post of desperately trying to change the subject... You do that because you are stumped we know.

Okay I see my previous questions even dumbed down were far too difficult for you and your hehe historian parents. Let's try an even easier one.

Was Jesus born at Mary and Joseph's home in Nazareth or hundreds of miles away in a manger in Bethlehem?

Surely he can answer this one right?
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text> Please have parents permission before ordering another package of my ignorance.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#172764 Jul 22, 2013
Your friend there has admitted he thinks fondly of infants being drowned in your God's name and has several times stated he wishes to see non believers decapitated and executed by Christians.

But that is civil in your eyes yes?
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>I am civil to those who are civil to me. Bob has been nothing but civil to me. Does he challenge me? Yes he does. Do I challenge him? He says I do and I have no reason to call him a liar. I'd like to ask you to lighten up on him. Most of the atheists here are reasonable even if we disagree.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#172765 Jul 22, 2013
Oh yes but I didn't want to get too advanced when he is unable to comprehend simpler concepts like an imperial roman would be committing suicide by writing that Jesus was the messiah.

Baby steps with that one Bob.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>Yep. And language analysis shows major inclusions and edits from one generational copy to the next..

... so much for his claim of "meticulous copy practice".

People don't change their stripes.

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) 4 min woodtick57 1,225,041
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 5 hr State the Obvious 309,765
mark moel loan house is here for you to uptain ... (Sep '13) Tue robert walker 6
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) Mon tom wingo 29,725
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... Apr 29 Sauck freedom 6
News Freshman Jonah Bolden declared ineligible for U... (Sep '14) Apr 29 tom wingo 4
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Apr 27 TerryE 5,306
More from around the web