Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258478 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.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#214628 Feb 24, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
You do realize that people are making fun of you, right?
No?
You should see the tweets.
Of course. What else can we do?

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#214629 Feb 24, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, first it was behind my back, now it's 'we're all'.

Blonde story telling...

Smirk.
When did I say "behind" your "back"?

Are you a blonde?

My smirk is better than yours.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#214630 Feb 24, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Copy/paste.....
And...
BAM!
Ehrman's right.
No, that's not the point. My position remains the same, doesn't change, and never has, which is this:

There is no fact based, non biased evidence of the Jesus as a "divine being" - IE: a god - and that goes for any of the human imagined god(S).

This is the point.

If you're going to post an excerpt from Ehrman, claiming that his view is legitimate concerning the historicity of the Jesus!, then you must also consider Ehrmans opinion valid in other areas as well.

You, or LBR might suddenly choose to disagree with Ehrman when it comes to statements - like the ones I supplied above - that don't support your position(S).

I've also got to point out, that when historians state that the character of the Jesus! was likely a literal person, they're not stating or affirming, the Jesus! was a "god", or supernatural being.

They're only saying it is likely that a human person by that name lived, and that's - all - they are saying.

If it is a scholar that makes the claim that he believes the Jesus is a "god", then that is his belief and nothing more. He has no non biased evidence concerning that. He's not making that claim based upon evidence which will be recognized as such by theists and non-theists alike.

Back to Ehrman. When he states that there are forgeries, fabrications, and alterations within NT texts, he's making that assessment based upon - textual criticism and what can be evaluated with any sort of reasonable surety - as a scholar.

Ehrman started out as a Christian, and after he embarked upon his education at Princeton within theology, he became agnostic.

This is my opinion, but I think he's probably an atheist, but avoids that term because of what it would likely do to his success within his chosen career/profession.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#214631 Feb 24, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That you judge only those who disagree with you, and ignore vicious, ugly and even violent behavior from your side.
.. your presumption is incorrect ..

.. in the past, I have disagreed and critiqued atheists, including AIN. Some posters are highly offended when I point out their tactless behavior ..

.. dissing involves a perpetrator, a target and an audience. By now, you must realize most of your audience does not appreciate your constant mocking ..

.. your targets reflect something you detest in self, it's really that simple ..

.. so says Dr. HL ..

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#214632 Feb 24, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
No, she runs like a sissy when you call her on lies.Smile.
.. when you were bullied in the playground, did you run like a sissy ??..

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#214633 Feb 24, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> We are arguing historicity, not divinity of Jesus. Ehrman confirms the historicity of the crucifixion of Jesus via Pilate and early Christians believe Jesus resurrected. Ehrman feigns ignorance when it comes to resurrection. In other words the resurrection is historical but if you rule out extra ordinary miracles at all places at all times because of a fixed bias then resurrection is abig question mark.
Case in point.

lightbeanrider wrote: "Ehrman feigns ignorance when it comes to resurrection."

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#214634 Feb 24, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> The problem is most people aren't going to be able to afford $640.00 a month and don't want a government hand out.
The problem is twofold the government wanted obamacare because it will gain them revenue. But even with new revenue it willl eventually collapse. obamacare is not sustainable it will collapse on it's own also.
So we are going to have another twin tower collapse, the government and heath care.
WTF are you going to do when that happens? Your policy wont be worth a nickle when it happens, and it will happen.
I'm sorry that's just more misinformation coupled this time with partisan doom and gloom soothsaying. The HC marketplace is designed to ensure that no one pays more than 9% of income. Anyone under that bar will be eligible for subsidy. They call that a "handout", but if their family is bankrupted by an unfeeling behemoth of a healthcare system, what will they call that?

As for the sky-falling component, well.........

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#214635 Feb 24, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> I don't have to ask any of these questions because my trust is in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ as actual history. Do the wiccans believe Jesus bodily resurrected? The Mormons? I don't know what point you are trying to make.
Do you believe Jesus bodily resurrected?
Doubtful so go ahead and take your pick because at the end of the day you will come up with snake eyes if you pick any of your references or none. It makes no difference. If you do not commit to Jesus then He don't help you when it really counts. You are on your own before a three times Holy God who made a provision for you and you rejected.
There it is.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#214636 Feb 24, 2014
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>No all I have is the words of an anonymous conseervative in an anonymous forum, together with the multiplicity of similar stories which either withhold vital information, or turn out to be completely false.
Ya'll done cried wolf too often. Ain't nobody listenin' but the kinfolk down the holler.
I have never once cried wolf.

I shared my story and you disbelieve it.

That's the fact.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#214637 Feb 24, 2014
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. how can we recognize this Satan guy? Does he really carry a pitchfork ??..
He has a Kubota tractor now.

Hell is getting so crowded that he started to square bail souls.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#214638 Feb 24, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Not Catholic.
My wife and I helped a couple. The husband is in the rapidly progressing stages of a crippling disease. The wife cried because they didn't expect anything and were surprised.
See the difference?
Smile.
Did you smirk at them too?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#214639 Feb 24, 2014
scaritual wrote:

No, that's not the point. My position remains the same, doesn't change, and never has, which is this:
There is no fact based, non biased evidence of the Jesus as a "divine being" - IE: a god - and that goes for any of the human imagined god(S).
This is the point.
If you're going to post an excerpt from Ehrman, claiming that his view is legitimate concerning the historicity of the Jesus!, then you must also consider Ehrmans opinion valid in other areas as well.
You, or LBR might suddenly choose to disagree with Ehrman when it comes to statements - like the ones I supplied above - that don't support your position(S).
I've also got to point out, that when historians state that the character of the Jesus! was likely a literal person, they're not stating or affirming, the Jesus! was a "god", or supernatural being.
They're only saying it is likely that a human person by that name lived, and that's - all - they are saying.
If it is a scholar that makes the claim that he believes the Jesus is a "god", then that is his belief and nothing more. He has no non biased evidence concerning that. He's not making that claim based upon evidence which will be recognized as such by theists and non-theists alike.
Back to Ehrman. When he states that there are forgeries, fabrications, and alterations within NT texts, he's making that assessment based upon - textual criticism and what can be evaluated with any sort of reasonable surety - as a scholar.
Ehrman started out as a Christian, and after he embarked upon his education at Princeton within theology, he became agnostic.
This is my opinion, but I think he's probably an atheist, but avoids that term because of what it would likely do to his success within his chosen career/profession.
I ready know your beliefs, scarscar. You don't have to repeat them to me.

I've never heard of Ehrman before today, I was mocking you for posting his opinion as if it's fact. I really don't care what he has to say.

You say: "If it is a scholar that makes the claim that he believes the Jesus is a "god", then that is his belief and nothing more." Very well.

If it is a scholar that makes the claim that he believes the Jesus is NOT a "god", then that is his belief and nothing more.(That'd be you and ole Ehrman)

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#214640 Feb 24, 2014
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. when you were bullied in the playground, did you run like a sissy ??..
..........misty water colored memories..........

......of the way we were.......

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#214641 Feb 24, 2014
ROCCO wrote:
<quoted text>
You're welcome. I am usually following this thread, mostly for the laughs I enjoy as a result of the antics of the "redeemed", and the enjoyment of reading words of reason and sensibility of such sage intellects as yourself.
The so-called "Christians" on this thread, IMO, have been doing a bang-up job of driving many AWAY from their cult. I thank them for the personal liberty they have helped me realize.
Keep me engaged, IANS!
Yeah, Rocco. I'm beginning to see exactly what you mean...

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#214642 Feb 24, 2014
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that's not the point. My position remains the same, doesn't change, and never has, which is this:
There is no fact based, non biased evidence of the Jesus as a "divine being" - IE: a god - and that goes for any of the human imagined god(S).
This is the point.
If you're going to post an excerpt from Ehrman, claiming that his view is legitimate concerning the historicity of the Jesus!, then you must also consider Ehrmans opinion valid in other areas as well.
Yeah, I identified Ehrman as an agnostic who leans towards atheism.
You, or LBR might suddenly choose to disagree with Ehrman when it comes to statements - like the ones I supplied above - that don't support your position(S).
Not to establish historicity.
I've also got to point out, that when historians state that the character of the Jesus! was likely a literal person, they're not stating or affirming, the Jesus! was a "god", or supernatural being.
What iz your problem? You do not need to establish divinity in order to establish historicity. No where did we say we agree with Ehrman on everything. Why would you think we would since he openly admits he is agnostic who leans towards atheism.
They're only saying it is likely that a human person by that name lived, and that's - all - they are saying.
No that is not all they are saying. What they are saying is there are some facts they all agree on. That is the experts in history. Baptism by John the Baptist. Crucifixion via Pilate. Early Christians believe Jesus resurrected.
Back to Ehrman. When he states that there are forgeries, fabrications, and alterations within NT texts, he's making that assessment based upon - textual criticism and what can be evaluated with any sort of reasonable surety - as a scholar.
That is another subject.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#214643 Feb 24, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
Yep.
Question:
What do you get, when you lock Genuine Christians™ of different brands in the same room?
Answer: a fight.
Most of the theists I've seen use either of these have used both. They don't even screw up consistently.

Appeal to Popularity Fallacy: Inclusive
No True Scotsman Fallacy: Exclusive
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#214644 Feb 24, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> I don't have to ask any of these questions because my trust is in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ as actual history. Do the wiccans believe Jesus bodily resurrected? The Mormons? I don't know what point you are trying to make.
Do you believe Jesus bodily resurrected?
Doubtful so go ahead and take your pick because at the end of the day you will come up with snake eyes if you pick any of your references or none. It makes no difference. If you do not commit to Jesus then He don't help you when it really counts. You are on your own before a three times Holy God who made a provision for you and you rejected.
The resurrection of Jesus is hardly "actual History." First when you consider there are NO contemporary accounts for Jesus outside of the bible. Any account for Jesus outside the bible are NOT contemporary, most are stories written about Jesus decades after his death. Many biblical scholars doubt the very existence of Jesus, at least the Jesus portrayed in the bible.

So says Professor Michael White from the University of Texas. "The Gospels are NOT biographies in the modern sense of the word, rather they are stories told in such a way as to invoke a certain image of Jesus for a particular audience. Think of these stories as a kind of "Preaching."

Paula Fredriksen professor of Appreciation of scriptures from Boston University. "The Gospel about Jesus are a kind of religious advertisment."

Allan Callahan professor at Harvard Divinity says, "You cannot take the Gospels as a factual account of the life of Jesus. The Gospels are of little value as eyewitness account of his life"

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#214645 Feb 24, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
..........misty water colored memories..........
......of the way we were.......


.. Catcher is going to have a shit fit ..

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#214646 Feb 24, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> I don't have to ask any of these questions because my trust is in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ as actual history. Do the wiccans believe Jesus bodily resurrected? The Mormons? I don't know what point you are trying to make.
Do you believe Jesus bodily resurrected?
Doubtful so go ahead and take your pick because at the end of the day you will come up with snake eyes if you pick any of your references or none. It makes no difference. If you do not commit to Jesus then He don't help you when it really counts. You are on your own before a three times Holy God who made a provision for you and you rejected.
Unwillingness to think logically about religions is of course your perogative.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#214647 Feb 24, 2014
KiMare wrote:
Honey, now you are just being plain stupid.
Your comment in no way answered my point, repeated below.

You **are** an idiot.

So what?
Egyptian civilization with EGYPTIAN GODS, lasted 4000 to 6000 years or more, depending on who you ask.
Chinese gods are even **older**-- lasting upwards of 10,000 years or so.
Your pathetic religion is a new kid on the block--
--- soon?
Your hate-cult will fade away too.

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 6 min Aura Mytha 57,708
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 24 min Aura Mytha 27,212
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 50 min Brad Shaw 1,739
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 1 hr Hedonist Heretic 5,939
News Washington court rules against florist in gay w... 2 hr Retribution 38
News Distrust of the non-religious runs deep in Amer... 2 hr Hedonist Heretic 102
Progress? 14 hr Eagle 12 62
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 15 hr Eagle 12 11,911
More from around the web