Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258047 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: Jun 07

Location hidden

#184332 Nov 15, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps I am not facing bad karma as you are, and therefore eternal existence is a positive thing. I do feel as some of your sort do have souls, and just want life to end, the soul would rather be no more than face the music.
Souls aren't real. Projecting your mentally ill lies upon society in order to "understand" it is childish and wrong.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#184333 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Is all of this part of a larger argument, perhaps one against the validity of one of the sciences, or an argument against the possibility of abiogenesis. I ask because I need to know where we're headed in order to know what points are worth rebutting.
With Christians - and I realize that you have a different god than they - I prefer not to argue science, since all that they can hope to do there is to establish the need for an intelligent designer, but not theirs. I'll generally stipulate to all of their antiscience just to get to the part where they begin to argue that their god was the designer, an easier and shorter rebuttal.
Besides, it's nearly impossible to discuss science with somebody who only knows what Christian apologists have taught him about it.
But in your case, I'm expecting a deluge of items that I would disagree with and an amorphous, featureless god that cannot be refuted, and want a clearer picture of where you're headed in order to choose my battles more wisely.
I am sorry, but you are too addicted to talking about "The Christian God" to tell me you don't believe in him. I would perhaps say this even if I was not a person that believes your thoughts do give life.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#184334 Nov 15, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me take a moment to explain to you why you are wasting your time. 1) Atheism as a proven fact, does mean we have nothing left to learn. 2) There is knowledge, that have to be rimed. 3) Knowledge denied and burned. 4) a society that does not stray, if atheist are in enough control. No new advancements. It is why I believe, if nature wants the human race to expire, we will evolve into soulless atheist. On that note ask yourself, does nature find us dangerous? My answer is. It's cleanup time.
Religious liars will try to lie about what atheism means.

Atheism is a simple disbelief in religious lies. It says nothing about advancements in science or society.

Religious liars, like creationists will try to assess atheism from inside their mentally ill cult mind, and so cannot understand how a universe can exist without an imaginary god - the main delusion suffered by people who have faith based illnesses.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184335 Nov 15, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
Actually, I play a Rogue copy of the violin shaped Hofner. I'm playing mostly jazz a les Cats and the Fiddle and other Harlem stylists. I've taken to playing with a fellow burnout who's girlfriend sings like an angel, too. Fun--and he manages to find well-paying gigs from time to time, too.
It sounds like you're having a ball.
NightSerf wrote:
Dang, I wish I could truck myself down to your piece of Mexican Heaven for a little jamming.
I would like that.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#184336 Nov 15, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me take a moment to explain to you why you are wasting your time. 1) Atheism as a proven fact, does mean we have nothing left to learn. 2) There is knowledge, that have to be rimed. 3) Knowledge denied and burned. 4) a society that does not stray, if atheist are in enough control. No new advancements. It is why I believe, if nature wants the human race to expire, we will evolve into soulless atheist. On that note ask yourself, does nature find us dangerous? My answer is. It's cleanup time.
I can't argue with that.

These atheists aren't atheists. They are spurious signals generated by growth. They will be brought into line or discharged to ground.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#184337 Nov 15, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Souls aren't real. Projecting your mentally ill lies upon society in order to "understand" it is childish and wrong.
Same as 184333

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#184338 Nov 15, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Religious liars will try to lie about what atheism means.
Atheism is a simple disbelief in religious lies. It says nothing about advancements in science or society.
Religious liars, like creationists will try to assess atheism from inside their mentally ill cult mind, and so cannot understand how a universe can exist without an imaginary god - the main delusion suffered by people who have faith based illnesses.
There is nothing to lie about, just let the atheist speak. Freedom of speech is a beautiful thing.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184339 Nov 15, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
Hi, IANS! I wonder if you are 'awed' nature ? That is to say, appreciate the power and majesty of the world. Can sit and smile during a summer rain or drive in terror through a blizzard. That sort of thing. Has nothing to do with God or anything. Just something I wondered.
Yes, absolutely. I just addressed that issue within the last 24 hours. You'veprobably found the link by now:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

The links before it and three posts after it are related, but doesn't address the scientific aspect. Make sure to watch the video. It will bring tears to your eyes.
BenAdam wrote:
I don't so much "worship" that which I call "God" (for lack of a better word in English) but am in 'awe' of the entire Universe and the laws that govern it. To me, the mysteries of how two individual cells combine to create every baby in history is more awesome than "God got Mary pregnant". The again, I never liked magic shows but loved the science behind the illusions.
Agreed. We are kindred spirits. A god belief per se doesn't strip one of the ability to have spiritual experiences. It's the Christian message of deep pessimism and disconnection from this world, everything in it, and even one's own flesh that is so antithetical to the authentic spiritual experience.
BenAdam wrote:
Anyway, sorry to ramble. I haven't been able to sleep tonight/morning.
You did no such thing.

And to those that don't know him, Ben is also an avid guitarist and singer. What a band we could form with blacklagoon on trumpet, NightSerf on bass, and you and me on guitar. River Tam is a violinist as I recall.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#184340 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Is all of this part of a larger argument, perhaps one against the validity of one of the sciences, or an argument against the possibility of abiogenesis. I ask because I need to know where we're headed in order to know what points are worth rebutting.
With Christians - and I realize that you have a different god than they - I prefer not to argue science, since all that they can hope to do there is to establish the need for an intelligent designer, but not theirs. I'll generally stipulate to all of their antiscience just to get to the part where they begin to argue that their god was the designer, an easier and shorter rebuttal.
Besides, it's nearly impossible to discuss science with somebody who only knows what Christian apologists have taught him about it.
But in your case, I'm expecting a deluge of items that I would disagree with and an amorphous, featureless god that cannot be refuted, and want a clearer picture of where you're headed in order to choose my battles more wisely.
It was all about how abiogenesis could be started according to the laws of physics and maintained after it started. Construction in this universe is by that polarity of charges. Opposites attract, like repels. This causes motion and existence. Just point out a random pattern that could happen and then replicate itself in the swirl of those energies.

But you won't.

IANS, you have a basic problem with a truly "scientific" approach to life. You are more concerned with what you think it is or should be than what it is.

Your ego clouds your judgement. But you know that.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#184341 Nov 15, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>Be careful putting your foot in your mouth.
I am glad you are so careful Dave while advising others to do the same. Maybe there is some human decency in you after all.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184342 Nov 15, 2013
truth wrote:
Why you think God need be Englishman or Englishwoman?
must be fun funny smart but very deadly sneaky way let down someone..
evil can be nice in suits too
wrote very nice but promice nothing
Zasto crv bjezi u vlagu.
How much crv as stonoga have lags..as chu chu chu chu chu chu..is your language c.uk.a.n.j.e
o really
stone age
is c.uk as m.uk
jeste li malo kuku cuk c.uk.nut.i
a tako stretni doboitnik je kikiriki from argetina..o well kikiriki is roots in vlaga aha
mojsture=vlaga
What a abot wog as fog?
In fog can grow up what..as para-mashroom.
Please tell me which pra-historic kingdom is?!
Is mashroom as gigant can be ijuju or hi hi haygrant..
Please tell me ,,for high grant..you need highwarant..hydrogen..bummmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
no thanks net.ros.imo dr.ogu..nechu nechu drogerashe chu chu chu a yes
chukanje c.uk a n j.e is to much talk..
you can find most evil set up blame as blamerige as po.me.r.id.ge..eh..
see
Why crv=warm go into mojshcer.
Poems is good yee
Neboj se majko
crva sto u vlagu bjezi
ni spodobe sto se nochu sulja
ni onog sto se krivo naglas kune
ni onog sto krivo sude
neokreci se
na njihove mutne vode
neokrechi se
na njihove mutne snove
jer dobrota
je ko sunce
sto na nebu visoko sije.
nkh
in tisini
You need to meet Dr. Shrink of Baltimore, who I believe is also Slavic. You're practically clones. I'd say socks, but I doubt that either of you could fake your IP location.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184343 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The way you and Nightserf use definitions is to take words with positive, intellectually respectable connotations and twist them to support your bias so as to appropriate a legitimacy to your ideas which otherwise would not apply.
A more honest approach, and one which I advocate, is choosing words based on their actual meaning in order to communicate a message, and abstaining from using words based on what we wish them to mean.
The use of "skepticism" is a sufficient example.
Neither of you employs a proper usage of the term, but you seek to borrow its implied intellectual legitimacy in service of an agenda.
This technique cannot be described as "descriptive lexicography".
A more simple and quaint description is available - "bull shit".
Thanks for sharing.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#184344 Nov 15, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Glad to disappoint you, Dave the Nazi man!
Is it true you are a Nazi Dave?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184345 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
"Disbelief" is not "not believing", nor is it "believing not". It is not that one does not believe. It is a refusal or inability to believe. Disbelief is not skepticism. "Atheism" is not a position that the existence of gods is impossible. Words mean things.
Thanks again.

Do you consider mean atheist?

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#184346 Nov 15, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't argue with that.
These atheists aren't atheists. They are spurious signals generated by growth. They will be brought into line or discharged to ground.
I honestly do wish I could agree with you, but I think those more social atheist, we know personally sound like these guys behind closed doors.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#184347 Nov 15, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You ignore realities to suit your pursuits.
pot/kettle

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#184348 Nov 15, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Your ego clouds your judgement.
pot/kettle
blacklagoon

Hyde Park, MA

#184349 Nov 15, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
For over 5,000 years there has been a lot of evidence that we do have souls. There is too much for me to even waste my time posting some sort of webpage to you. The Buddhist religion is based on sciences, and I can't concern myself with the idea you don't respect their sciences, as well as many other civilizations sciences. Besides why read Robert Stevens, if you were serious about leaning, the library and book stores are open.
Ahh, your favorite lame ass ploy, "I'd show you the evidence but I'd just be wasting my time." Too funny.

Show me the scientific documentation that shows "souls" to exist. Not personal experiences, or anecdotal accounts, REAL science. Bet you can't. I know you can't otherwise humans having this soul thing would be acceptable scientific knowledge. All you have now is the exact same proof as for werewolves. Stories, personal experiences, whispers in the dark.. You are no different from our distant relatives who when confronted with something they could not possible understand, simply made shit up, usually involving a mysterious God thing.

You can ONLY validate this soul thing with credible science, and I KNOW you have no shot at that. Your soul thing is a myth much like your God/Gods/Alien Gods/ or whatever foolishness you believe,

The Buddhist religion is based on "science" Really? Care to show where that is true. And when you say I don't believe in "THEIR SCIENCE" WTF does that mean? Science is science, there is only one scientific method You talk as though science is something that can be different to different people, each one having their "own" science. Leads me to believe you really don't have a grasp as to what constitutes *science*

“e pluribus unum”

Since: Dec 10

primus inter pares

#184350 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
"Disbelief" is not "not believing", nor is it "believing not".
It is not that one does not believe.
It is a refusal or inability to believe.
Disbelief is not skepticism.
"Atheism" is not a position that the existence of gods is impossible.
Words mean things.
Such precision of word meaning seems to be pretty important with select words to you Buck.
English has never been so rigid in definition, as words are bent in our language more often than not. So much so, it causes the dictionary to have to be revised from time to time.
Atheism has become a blanket term, not needing the precision of complete description to convey what it means from individual to another. I just wonder why you require this level of precision, when someone tells you they are atheist? Because under blanket terms, atheist just means "a person that doesn't believe in god".

The nuance's of this blanket expression is left for those who wish to qualify exactly what their thoughts are.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#184351 Nov 15, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Ahh, your favorite lame ass ploy, "I'd show you the evidence but I'd just be wasting my time." Too funny.
Show me the scientific documentation that shows "souls" to exist. Not personal experiences, or anecdotal accounts, REAL science. Bet you can't. I know you can't otherwise humans having this soul thing would be acceptable scientific knowledge. All you have now is the exact same proof as for werewolves. Stories, personal experiences, whispers in the dark.. You are no different from our distant relatives who when confronted with something they could not possible understand, simply made shit up, usually involving a mysterious God thing.
You can ONLY validate this soul thing with credible science, and I KNOW you have no shot at that. Your soul thing is a myth much like your God/Gods/Alien Gods/ or whatever foolishness you believe,
The Buddhist religion is based on "science" Really? Care to show where that is true. And when you say I don't believe in "THEIR SCIENCE" WTF does that mean? Science is science, there is only one scientific method You talk as though science is something that can be different to different people, each one having their "own" science. Leads me to believe you really don't have a grasp as to what constitutes *science*
If you were paying attention and honest about it, I would not have to offer proof. As I mentioned for over 5,000 years the proof has been written, collected and it is online. You've been ignorant to it, I would be vain if I thought I could prove to you, what so many others for so longs has known.

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) 5 min Aquarius-wy 1,460,379
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 6 hr Pee Pee Pete 32,619
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 8 hr ThomasA 312,873
News Western Michigan heads to Illinois as a favorite Dec 7 Go Blue Forever 59
legitimate loan lender (Oct '13) Dec 5 Yin 17
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Nov 28 Local Warming 10,371
Should child beauty pageants be banned? (Sep '14) Nov 22 Heatherfeather 780
More from around the web