Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Read more
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#181172 Oct 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
It references university papers and books.
But you would **know** that, if you had BEEN on the site.
Clearly? You are afraid of it.
LOL!
Proof of evolution: http://www.talkorigins.org/
none proof of evolution htto://www.talkorginins.org

Atheist yakking and quacking about pseudo science.

May I suggest a much better read about evolution.

"The Emperor's New Clothes" by Hans Christian Andersen
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#181173 Oct 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
And?
Most of you religious types are against education.
So ... the correlation holds.
Would you like to gather us all up in box cars and send us to death camps?

Good luck on that one. Your forefathers messed up and gave us the right to bare arms.

You know what that means Bob? No death camps for us believers here in America.

Only wishful thinking by the intolerant.

Gotta go, the World Series is on.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#181174 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
That wasn't meant to be taken funny.
Oh! So your hate was intentional?

How Jesus of you.

But your fantasizes of pedophilia is now out in the open...

.... meh.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#181175 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
none proof of evolution htto://www.talkorginins.org
Atheist yakking and quacking about pseudo science.
May I suggest a much better read about evolution.
"The Emperor's New Clothes" by Hans Christian Andersen
You are afraid to go to that site-- it's all about scientific papers and university experiments.

You would **know** that, if you bothered to go there--

-- but you are quaking in fear, so you dare not.

Your faith might .... falter.

Can't have that, can we?

You would rather remain ignorant, than to lose your hideous faith.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#181176 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you like to gather us all up in box cars and send us to death camps?
Nope.. That was a **religious** "solution".

I'm not religious, so no.

I would rather **educate** you-- but it's very difficult to overcome willful stupidity (faith).

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#181177 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
Good luck on that one. Your forefathers messed up and gave us the right to bare arms.
Classic: you immediately resort to violence.

The hallmark of a True Believerô-- kill anyone you do not approve of.

History is full of such actions by you people.
blacklagoon

Revere, MA

#181178 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
They had a choice, "Should I play it safe and get in the life boat?Ē
The Atheist of the time decided it was all a hoax, a myth by a mythical God.
Then slowly came the big drops of rain. The lightning with the extra loud K-BOOM, followed by the monsoon.
They had a choice but because of unbelief they died.
Always remember Doctor, you also had a choice.
Let me ask about the extremely religious folks in South America. Or perhaps in Australia, are you trying to say that only deeply religious people lived close to the giant Ark? What if I loved Jesus with all my heart and worshiped God every day, but lived an ocean away? Are you saying ONLY Atheists died in the flood? No one else of religious died? Please try and be clear, its important. Why did God drown the devoutly religious? Not everyone on the Planet could have made it to the Ark, and there would not have been room for millions of people along with all of the animals Couldn't God somehow save these people who loved and adored him?
blacklagoon

Revere, MA

#181179 Oct 24, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism#Crit...
That is your movement.
Read the whole article.
So many disaffected simple minded idiots for them to save the world.
Onward Atheist soldier!
Marching off to war
With the brain of Dawkins
Going on before.
Hmmm..we need a catchy tune to go with that. Can you think of one?
Reading comprehension maybe.....I don't converse with the mentally unstable, sorry!!!!!
blacklagoon

Revere, MA

#181180 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh for crying out loud Bob. This talkorgins.com site is an Atheist web site.
Itís not even a science university web. No wonder you canít get anything right.
"The Talk.Origins Archive is a collection of articles and essays that explore the creationism/evolution controversy from a mainstream scientific perspective. In other words, the authors of most of the articles in this archive accept the prevailing scientific view that the earth is ancient, that there was no global flood, and that evolution is responsible for the earth's present biodiversity.

Notice that nowhere does it mention Atheists views, but do notice it addresses MAINSTREAM SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE. Also...accept the PREVAILING SCIENTIFIC VIEW.

Now should we have that discussion about your conspiracy theory? Does *mainstream science* equal Atheist to you? Does *prevailing scientific view* mean scientist ALL have an Atheistic agenda?
blacklagoon

Revere, MA

#181181 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Itís an Atheist site ran and moderated by Atheist.
Would you please be so kind as to show use your evidence that this site is run and moderated by Atheists. Remember once again, you just can't make shit up and expect it to fly. Proof, evidence, supported documentation, observable facts, do you have anything even close to that? If so, blast away!!!!!!! Or you can apologize for telling a big fib!!!!!!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181182 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
The Bible even says a day to the Lord is like a thousand years. This is a metaphoric statement meaning that Godís time is not the same as mans.
The bible contradicts itself repeatedly. It's quite easy to defend almost any position and its opposite by choosing to accept one scripture or set of scriptures as literal and the contrary set as figurative or no longer operational. Anybody who chooses to believe in a metaphorical day of creation points to the scripture that you just did. And if you choose to believe that the bible writer intended a literal day, you go to Genesis, where it refers to the days of creation as having mornings and and evenings.

What message do you suppose that sends to skeptics about the bible as a source of wisdom or useful information, and about believers and the basis of their convictions?
Eagle 12 wrote:
However Atheist try to limit Christianity to the 1950ís interpretation.
Atheists do that? I think it's the fundamentalists that are the ones you have a problem with. So do we. You're a little more reasonable for accepting the geology. You could just as easily deal with it as you do the biology.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181183 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
itís going to take more than artist conceptions and a sparse few broken bones to convince me that man evolved from apes.
We have much more than that. You seem committed to rejecting that science.

How about the intact bones? They're not human, nor any kind of ape in existence.

How about human chromosome 2?
Eagle 12 wrote:
We have seen some fraudulent and grossly exaggerated data coming from evolutionist in my lifetime. Haeckel's drawings for example was in my biology books as a kid. It was all a Fraud. Then I remember seeing in 1999 Nat Geo, this new fossil called ďArchaeoraptor liaoningensis,Ē the missing link between birds and dinosaurs. It turns out it was all fabricated but sold to millions as legit. Nat Geo did a great job on itís color photoís. Hell it looked real impressive. Atheist everywhere were like proud fathers pushing out their chest in pride. And quite frankly speaking the evolution of man is just chocked full of fraudulent, misinterpreted, bogus, fake, artist conceptions, and wild imagination.
Are those your standards for rejecting a field of science? How about if you applied it to theology. There have been uncounted numbers of religious frauds unearthed. Are you willing to apply the same standards for rejection there? If not, how do you justify having separate standards for the two?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181184 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I could be wrong but I think most Atheist are pro abortion.
It should be called pro murdering of infants.
The pro choice should be when it comes to prevention.
To abstain or use a condom? Naw that's too easy.
Just abort them when they are alive and healthy. Pro murder.
Here you are calling people that lawfully terminate an embryo or fetus "murderers" of "infants." Murder is illegal, and infants breathe air.

How do you suppose that serves you? Do you think it makes your argument more compelling to anybody that doesn't already accept it?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181185 Oct 24, 2013
LCNLin wrote:
No proof of the atheist philosophy/religion
Amusing
What do you want with proof of anything that contradicts your faith based beliefs? What would you do with it? Allow yourself to understand it, acknowledge it, and use it to modify your position?

No. That is not what faith based thinking is about. Evidence is not part of the process.

So what's all this talk about proof?

Besides, you don't seem to understand the rationalist skeptic's thought processes, the same ones that rejected alchemy and astrology, and replaced them with chemistry and astronomy. We don't require (dis)proof to reject claims. We require it to call them true. Nobody ever disproved astrology.

Likewise, we are quite content to reject god claims without disproving them, just as you (presumably) reject leprechaun and vampire claims without proof.

You have no proof of the aleprechaunist philosophy/religion. Is that a deal killer for you? Of course not. Nor is it for atheists.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#181186 Oct 24, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
none proof of evolution htto://www.talkorginins.org
Atheist yakking and quacking about pseudo science.
May I suggest a much better read about evolution.
"The Emperor's New Clothes" by Hans Christian Andersen
Eagle, you are gonna need to mix up your references. You trot out the "emperor's new clothes" like twice a day.

As an aside - everyone, eagle is clearly a lost cause. His mind is old and set in its ways, and it takes a combination of self awareness, humility, and intelligence to admit that you're wrong and that the "other side" has better evidence. Especially when dealing with such a big issue, changing your mind is incredibly hard.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#181187 Oct 25, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Itís an Atheist site ran and moderated by Atheist.
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Would you please be so kind as to show use your evidence that this site is run and moderated by Atheists. Remember once again, you just can't make shit up and expect it to fly. Proof, evidence, supported documentation, observable facts, do you have anything even close to that? If so, blast away!!!!!!! Or you can apologize for telling a big fib!!!!!!
This is something I notice. Theists, and in particular many Christian theists will buy into just about any of the "conspiracy" theories that they are presented or happen across.

I tend to think it comes from the nature of their religion itself. From the beginning of their religious tome the two central characters were duped -->"conspiracy".

The deity was possibly testing them in giving them free will --> "conspiracy".

The entire book is filled with--> "conspiracy", after ,--> "conspiracy", and >e v e r y o n e< is in danger of being "duped", by the Satan! deity, or being "tested" by the Yahweh! deity - past, present and future - twenty four hours a day.

If you look at the mythology over all, it's nothing but one huge collection of "conspiracies" all designed to fool mankind. In that religion, they accept no real responsibility for their actions, although the members will claim that's what it's all about.

In examination of the religion, however, from the very onset - it is someone else's fault - that they (the "sinner") "sin", and are corrupted etc...

Damn A&E and that damned serpent!

So "original sin" is instituted, that is the origin of their plight. It has little to do with them, personally, they are doomed to be as they are, from before birth, it can't be escaped, because, they're the victim of a conspiracy.

From that point forward, they see man as a cork on the ocean of conspiracy, unable to do anything but react and unable to avoid the plots and machinations of the trickster deity, or the perfect deity, who also is a part of the conspiracy.

They start out life being told that an invisible and malevolent entity is out to get them and deceive them from day one, and that the deity they worship is testing them as well.

Essentially, every day of their life they have to approach what they do with the thought in mind;

"Is my trickster deity trying to deceive me so I'll go to hell, or is my deity trying to test me so it can decide if it's going to send me to hell..?"

It's no wonder they see vampires, werewolves, mad scientists, manipulative world organizations and various other imagined adversaries lined up against them around every corner and lurking behind every door, icon ...

Or website.

Someone or some thing is always trying to fool them.

<theist> "Science is a CONSPIRACY!"

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181188 Oct 25, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
They had a choice, "Should I play it safe and get in the life boat?Ē
The Atheist of the time decided it was all a hoax, a myth by a mythical God.
Then slowly came the big drops of rain. The lightning with the extra loud K-BOOM, followed by the monsoon.
They had a choice but because of unbelief they died.
Always remember Doctor, you also had a choice.
The people that died in the Great Flood had a choice to get onto the ark but refused? Not as I learned the story. By the time that Jehovah commanded Noah to build the ark, those people were already on death row without hope of parole.

And what a terrible story. Here's a god who we are told has infinite power, including the power to just put everybody to sleep or make them disappear, yet chose this incredibly cruel and terrifying way to nearly sterilize the earth not only of humanity, but of all other terrestrial life, not to mention whatever marine life could not survive a four-fold reduction in the ocean's salinity.

Imagine how they died - the water levels rising, animals everywhere seeking higher ground until they could go no higher, the water rising further yet, craning their necks upward in vain as the water levels rose further, and with their eyes bulging terror, finally, just after their last breaths, their lungs filling with water. Was that necessary?

How do you love a god like that? Fear, yes. Cringe, yes, Obey, yes. But love?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181189 Oct 25, 2013
Mikko wrote:
No religion found in atheism
Eagle 12 wrote:
I know you are in Europe but our Federal Courts here in the US disagree. I happen to disagree with the Federal Courts but it's the law of our land.
It sounds like you agree with Mikko if you disagree with the courts. You seem to realize that the American courts do not create any part of reality other than how laws are interpreted for Americans.

Atheism is not a religion. Neither is secular humanism - unless you are willing to call any belief system a religion regardless of what it advocates.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181190 Oct 25, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism#Crit...
That is your movement.
Read the whole article.
So many disaffected simple minded idiots for them to save the world.
Onward Atheist soldier!
Marching off to war
With the brain of Dawkins
Going on before.
Hmmm..we need a catchy tune to go with that. Can you think of one?
Yes, unbelief is "marching" on. And yes, we are disaffected by religion. We think that we have something better to offer - secular humanism - and growing numbers of people seem to be in agreement.

If Christianity and the Christian church have an effective argument to make in its own defense, it should make it. Wouldn't you agree that if it can't, it should be replaced by whatever people are leaving it for and finding more appropriate?

That's the democratic process. That's how the marketplace of ideas works in an open society where information is exchanged freely - something greatly facilitated by modern technology including satellite telecommunications and the Internet. That may be why the process has accelerated over the last generation or so.

Do you disapprove? If so, why? On what basis?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#181191 Oct 25, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh for crying out loud Bob. This talkorgins.com site is an Atheist web site. Itís not even a science university web. No wonder you canít get anything right.
What's a science university web?

Talk Origins is a secular web site that features the science and philosophy that rebuts the claims of Christian apologists. Does that alone invalidate its content for you?

If not, what does?

Regarding secular versus Christian apologetics websites, there's a huge difference: there is no claim about objective reality found only on a Christian website that is true. If it's about nature and it's correct, it can be found in secular resources such as scientific journals and the web sites and pages that cite them.

The upshot of that is that if anything about science and nature on a Christian website is true, it was imported from the secular source where the science was developed and reported. And if no such source exists, the Christian site made it up.

Do you disagree with any of that? If so, can you find us any empirically confirmed science that does not appear in a secular resource? And if not, do you have a valid criticism of somebody insisting that Christians also cite secular sources to support their scientific claims, the argument being that if they can't, the information was likely developed by religious apologists to support their faith?

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) 9 min sonicfilter 1,207,470
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr cpeter1313 309,297
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 2 hr Big D 201,801
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 3 hr stewart scott 29,295
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... 8 hr Lora_14 4
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 20 hr Earthling-1 4,981
How to recover lost data from iPhone/iPad/iPod- (Jan '14) Mar 26 kareeo 14
More from around the web