Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258039 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.

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#175050 Aug 19, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
I have clarified this before, but the passions of the atheist crowd tend to get in their way. You gave me a good sentence there to modify so they may understand better where I am coming from.
"You seem to think that compassion and morality is generated by church teachings"
Make that read "You seem to think that compassion and morality WAS generated by church teachings".
What you consider those things are built upon generations of them being taught in those religions, in spite of men being hypocrites. You wouldn't have this modern human secular humanism without that preceding.
I'm really rather detached from religion. I look at it and mankind a lot more objectively than most. That is why I don't "react" to it like Topix atheists do. I do react to their getting carried away with their reactions, but that is really a recreational activity rather than an emotional reaction.
Do I believe in a higher force or intelligence behind this existence thing. Yes I do. That is from my technological training and understanding and applying basic physics on the larger scale. There is no poofing into existence and becoming a observed closed system the way the reactors to religion have adopted as a substitute religion.
Existence is way beyond me. I'm here, I'm a machine, I have something running me on the subconscious level. It's kicked my ass royal and it has been good to me. Not a thing I can do about it, so I am just along for the ride. It's an experience. Yet I am a Christian fundie in the eyes of most Topix atheists and think with a religious passion. While they rant on and on about all the evils of it. Amusing. None of them seem to realize if every single thing, even footsteps, did not occur the way they did, and this includes all of those evils, they would not be here to rant and whine about them. It's how they got here. Plus they are disrespecting the hell out of their ancestors, which if you think about it, just makes them lower their own worth. If junk made you, you are junk.
Like I told you, I was an atheist for 50 years. You don't return to fundamentalism after that. Coupled with what I mentioned about technology, you also don't take people and life so seriously.
You seem to think that the same (or similar) religions were in all places all over the globe at all times. No, religion did not spawn human secularism. Believe it or not, some have simply learned that in order to get along, certain conditions must be met. No deity required for the larger picture.

As for the rest...let's see, blah-de-blah, blah, blah....you seem to confuse technology with the supernatural...ummmm...you think you are a machine...ok, fine, whatevs.

Yep, you are an ego driven loose cannon. Fortunately, a nonsensical string of words is not dangerous to your fellow man. Carry on!....;0)

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#175051 Aug 19, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry...I don't think that I'm quite as old as you, but I can't agree that morality was generated by the churches. I am curious though why you feel this way, if you don't mind me asking.
Enforcement by peer pressure. It became part of your genes over time. It raised humanity above pure action/reaction and selfish desires. Man is made to behave.

Plus those book based religions gave the same template for each new generation to interpret and adapt for their own age, while also preserving a bridge to the old. Living books. Less ad lib development of civilization.

It's all part of evolution.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#175052 Aug 19, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to think that the same (or similar) religions were in all places all over the globe at all times. No, religion did not spawn human secularism. Believe it or not, some have simply learned that in order to get along, certain conditions must be met. No deity required for the larger picture.
As for the rest...let's see, blah-de-blah, blah, blah....you seem to confuse technology with the supernatural...ummmm...you think you are a machine...ok, fine, whatevs.
Yep, you are an ego driven loose cannon. Fortunately, a nonsensical string of words is not dangerous to your fellow man. Carry on!....;0)
Nice rant, Glad to give you something to vent with.:-)

My ego is less self centered than your ego.

Those get along lessons were passed to later generations as religions.

Yes, secular humanism existed, but only for the ruling group. Ask the slaves used for anal sex by their Greek masters.

Christianity was the first religion to go global worshiping a universal creator on a personal level. No tribe, no political group exclusivity, nor even ritual worship. It was there, but it wasn't part of the teachings. It also ended blood sacrifices.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#175053 Aug 19, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>Enforcement by peer pressure. It became part of your genes over time. It raised humanity above pure action/reaction and selfish desires. Man is made to behave.

Plus those book based religions gave the same template for each new generation to interpret and adapt for their own age, while also preserving a bridge to the old. Living books. Less ad lib development of civilization.

It's all part of evolution.
I understand what you're saying. Is it in your opinion, since I don't have faith in a god, that I don't carry good morals because of that fact?

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#175054 Aug 19, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>

My ego is less self centered than your ego.
Dave.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#175055 Aug 19, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand what you're saying. Is it in your opinion, since I don't have faith in a god, that I don't carry good morals because of that fact?
Not at all. I said you have them because of those generations of moral teachings by religion. It is part of your culture. You are an ethnic Christian whether you believe in Jesus or not. He won.:-)

If you believe your morality is something that arises from within you, then you need to re-evaluate just what you do believe,or not believe in. The strictly materialistic view of existence requires such things to be learned.

You can develop an empathy and such for those you grew up with, as they are a part of your very world. But going beyond that to outsiders is something different. You just can't trust them until you know them. some of them will smile at you, then kill you for something you have and they want. To know them you have to live with them. Religion spread that tribal value of empathy, etc to larger political groups. It became the shared values, and thus a mechanism for trust and merging of groups.

The first gods were pretty much local. Monotheism became the universal ruler establishing morals all must follow.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#175056 Aug 19, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Dave.
Yes, my child? You have a question for me?

It will have to wait till morning. I'm going to bed. Good night.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#175057 Aug 20, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all. I said you have them because of those generations of moral teachings by religion. It is part of your culture. You are an ethnic Christian whether you believe in Jesus or not. He won.:-)

If you believe your morality is something that arises from within you, then you need to re-evaluate just what you do believe,or not believe in. The strictly materialistic view of existence requires such things to be learned.

You can develop an empathy and such for those you grew up with, as they are a part of your very world. But going beyond that to outsiders is something different. You just can't trust them until you know them. some of them will smile at you, then kill you for something you have and they want. To know them you have to live with them. Religion spread that tribal value of empathy, etc to larger political groups. It became the shared values, and thus a mechanism for trust and merging of groups.

The first gods were pretty much local. Monotheism became the universal ruler establishing morals all must follow.
While I don't agree that it was a religious beginning, I do agree that religion has helped to spread a set of moral values that it has established. It is good to know that you do not hold the idea that all non-believers hold a corrupt set of moral value, and thank you for conversing with me peacefully :-). It is not done often enough and greatly appreciated.:-)

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#175059 Aug 20, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, my child? You have a question for me?
It will have to wait till morning. I'm going to bed. Good night.
I have a question, why can't you creationists grow some balls and:

1. Prove the gods your're here to lie about.
2. Stop attacking hard science we use everyday, when you can't even prove your god.
3. Correct your rag bible and remove the parts about atheists being fool - forever.

See if you are brave enough to challenge your cult leaders with the facts they are so frightened of?

You can't do any of this because you are a conscious liar for your cult.

You mental illness means you cannot confront the fact that you have no proof of god or accept that you're lying to complete strangers.

After your brainwashing by the creationist cult, you have lost all of your logical facilities.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#175060 Aug 20, 2013
Bible Study 101

The Bible means exactly what it says.

If what the Bible literally says contradicts your church's doctrine then it is figurative and must be interpreted to fit the church's doctrine.

If there are two contradictory statements in the Bible only the one that agrees with your church's doctrine is literal, the is figurative and must be interpreted to match the church's doctrine.

If you can't find support for a particular church doctrine then search for a passage that can be interpreted to match church doctrine.

Always invoke the Holy Spirit's guidance to back your interpretation, the Holy Spirit is never wrong and to argue against it is irrevocable damnation to eternal torment in Hell.

How to tell if your interpretation is of the Holy Spirit: The interpretation will match church doctrine.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#175061 Aug 20, 2013
I am so glad you have stopped pretending to be a Deist and not a fundie Christian. We all knew you were one Dave thanks for proving us right. Explain how countries that never embraced Christianity still have morals in fact many peoples who never accepted Christianity have better morals than the majority of you and your fellow Christians. You are really so senile to think that 2000 years of Christianity evolved everyone in world Christian or not?

Wow Senile Dave that is ultra low IQ even for you.
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all. I said you have them because of those generations of moral teachings by religion. It is part of your culture. You are an ethnic Christian whether you believe in Jesus or not. He won.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#175062 Aug 20, 2013
Holy effing sht you are in lala head injury land big time now.

SMH.

Seriously Gramps you really don't believe this right? You are trying to look ultra stupid on purpose right? You really aren't this ignorant right?

Right Dave?
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
No tribe, no political group exclusivity, nor even ritual worship. It was there, but it wasn't part of the teachings. It also ended blood sacrifices.
LCNlin

United States

#175063 Aug 20, 2013
Albert Einstein called himself an agnostic, while disassociating himself from the label atheist.
Score one for agnostics!

Scratch an atheist and they often turn out to be agnostic. Richard Dawkins

waiting for proof of atheism,
take your time?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#175064 Aug 20, 2013
LCNlin wrote:
Albert Einstein called himself an agnostic, while disassociating himself from the label atheist.
Score one for agnostics!
Scratch an atheist and they often turn out to be agnostic. Richard Dawkins
waiting for proof of atheism,
take your time?
I am atheist.

That proof enough?

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#175065 Aug 20, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I am atheist.
That proof enough?
you're dumb
Thinking

Royston, UK

#175066 Aug 20, 2013
Me too.

Atheism exists.
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I am atheist.
That proof enough?
LCNlin

United States

#175067 Aug 20, 2013
Scratch an atheist and out pops Richard Dawkins and agnostic
LCNlin

United States

#175068 Aug 20, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>you're dumb
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I am atheist.
That proof enough?

Not exactly proof :-)

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#175069 Aug 20, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
I know next to nothing about Physics, Quantum Theory, higher math, etc.
Time and determined study can probably fix that.
I often argue from the viewpoint of my experience and/or knowledge. Why these theological arguments usually wind up with bickering over a scientific point that leans neither towards or away from supernatural powers, I've never quite understood. Science can only deal with what can be proven.***shrugs***
This happens because theological arguments are often based on assumptions that can be shown to be wrong via science. For example, the 'first cause' argument is full of holes, both because the notion of causality is itself problematic and because it fails to prove what is claimed. The science can show how the argument fails by specific examples.
I DO know better than to argue from lack of comprehension (be it ignorance or stupidity), lol.
Which is far better than most who engage in theological arguments.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#175070 Aug 20, 2013
LCNlin wrote:
Albert Einstein called himself an agnostic, while disassociating himself from the label atheist.
Score one for agnostics!
Scratch an atheist and they often turn out to be agnostic. Richard Dawkins
waiting for proof of atheism,
take your time?
You don't really understand what Dawkins was saying, do you? Or what "proof" means, hey.

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 Joy 1,457,804
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 2 hr silly rabbit 312,662
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 15 hr Lavar Ball 32,588
News Western Michigan heads to Illinois as a favorite 21 hr Go Blue Forever 57
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Nov 28 Local Warming 10,372
Should child beauty pageants be banned? (Sep '14) Nov 22 Heatherfeather 780
legitimate loan lender (Oct '13) Nov 20 Sandra Tillman 16
More from around the web