Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256006 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.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#130285 Oct 17, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =b0NlXKPaqZgXX
:)

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#130286 Oct 17, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
I had a movement this morning does that count?
Dropped the kids off at the pool, did you? Downloaded and logged out? Pinched a loaf? Dooked one out? Shuffled off that mortal coil? Took the Browns to the Superbowl?

Since: Mar 11

Latonia, KY

#130287 Oct 17, 2012
Nope. You really need to read the bible.
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Daniel 12:1-2. Sounds like hell to me.

“Game Over”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#130288 Oct 17, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Dropped the kids off at the pool, did you? Downloaded and logged out? Pinched a loaf? Dooked one out? Shuffled off that mortal coil? Took the Browns to the Superbowl?
dump [-0123456789acLnSu][-B records][-b blocksize][-C cachesize]
[-D dumpdates][-d density][-f file |-P pipecommand][-h level]
[-s feet][-T date] filesystem

Ahhhhh :-)

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#130290 Oct 17, 2012
Serah wrote:
You can't tell me a big bang populating the Planet with all we see is 'natural' or of our laws of nature, surely?
Of course we can. How can anything that exists not be natural? Everything that exists is nature, and subject to natural law. That's by definition.
Serah wrote:
You don't believe in the supernatural? Supernatural (one of the meanings) "2 a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature"
"Supernatural" is as empty and meaningless a word as "juxtanatural" or "infranatural."

If there were a god it would be just as natural as anything else, and subject to natural law. A god couldn't exists without being subject to natural laws that allow it to exist.

You're arguing that the universe needs a god because it is too complex to have self-organized, but that the even more complex designer god doesn't need its own designer god because [fill in the blank].

Such an argument is the logical fallacy called special pleading. You grant the god the ability to have properties that you refuse the universe for no good reason.

We have to explain it all, whether god plus universe, or godless universe alone - or else accept that some of it is inexplicable. If one can accept that an infinitely complex god can exist uncaused or self-caused, then one can accept that universes can, too. All arguments from complexity are similarly doomed.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#130291 Oct 17, 2012
Serah wrote:
Indeed; I understand scripture 6, I hear GOD blamed many times for the acts of man(kind)...
"Mass Killings And Cruelties Ordered, Committed, Approved By God" at http://www.holysmoke.org/hs00/killer2.htm

[1] The entire population of the earth at the time of Noah, except for eight survivors.(Genesis 7:23)
[2] Everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah.(Genesis 19:24,25)
[3] Amalek and his people.(Exodus 17:8-16)
[4] 3,000 Israelites.(Exodus 32:27,28)
[5] 14,700 Jews.(Numbers 16:44-49)
[6] The people of Og. "So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land." (Numbers 21:33-35)
[7] 24,000 people.(Numbers 25:49)
[8] All Midianite males.(Numbers 31:6-12)
[9] The Ammonites.(Deuteronomy 2:19-21)
[10] The Horims.(Deuteronomy 2:22)
[11] The Amorites. "…utterly destroyed the men and the women and the little ones." (Deuteronomy 2:33-35)
[12] The Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. "... thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them;" (Deuteronomy 7:15)
[13] Everyone in Jericho but one family.(Joshua 6:20-25)
[14] 12,000 people of Ai.(Joshua 8:19-29)
[15] All the people of Makkedah.(Joshua 10:28)
[16] All the people of Libnah.(Joshua 10:29,30)
[17] All the people of Gezer.(Joshua 10:33)
[18] All the people of Eglon.(Joshua 10:34,35)
[19] All the people of Hebron.(Joshua 10:36,37)
[20] 10,000 Perizzites and Canaanites.(Judges 1:4)
[21] All inhabitants of the land of Goshen "...(Joshua 11:1216)
[22] The inhabitants of Hormah, Gaza, Askelon, Ekron.(Judges 1:17-19)
[23] 10,000 Moabites.(Judges 3:29)
[24] 600 Philistines.(Judges 3:31)
[25] All the hosts of Sisera.(Judges 4:16)
[26] 120,000 Midianites.(Judges 8:10)
[27] 1,000 Philistines.(Judges 15:15)
[28] 25,100 Benjaminites.(Judges 20:35)
[29] 50,070 people of Bethshemesh.(1 Samuel 6:19)
[30] All the Amalekites. "Slay both man and woman, infant and suckling…." (1 Samuel 15:37)
[31] 200 Philistine men, for their foreskins as the price for buying a bride.(1 Samuel 18:27)
[32] 22,000 Syrians.(2 Samuel 8:5)
[33] 40,000+ Syrians.(2 Samuel 10:18)
[34] The Ammonites of Rabbah, tortured to death by King David.(2 Samuel 12:29-31)
[35] 70,000 people.(2 Samuel 24:15)
[36] Every man in Edom.(1 Kings 11:15)
[37] All the prophets of Baal.(1 Kings 18:40)
[38] 127,000 Syrians.(1 Kings 20:28-30)
[39] Moabite captains & "fifties." (2 Kings 1:9-14)
[40] 42 children, eaten by bears.(2 Kings 2:23,24)
[41] 185,000 Assyrians killed in their sleep.(2 Kings 19:35)
[42] 500,000 men of Israel.(2 Chronicles 13:16-20)
[43] 20,000 Edomites.(2 Chronicles 25:11,12)
[44] 120,000 Judeans in one day.(2 Chronicles 28:5,6)
[45] 75,500+ people.(Esther 9:12-14)

According to your scriptures, your god is the most vicious murderer of humanity in the history of fiction. Because not only did he order all of the genocides listed above, but he let the earth repopulate just to destroy all life on it a second time.

Worse, he is said to have given us each an immortal soul, and will keep it conscious for eternity, where most will suffer excruciating pain that benefits nobody except his sadist buddy Satan.

Yet you defend this creature in your posting. And you say that it loves you. You even worship it. Why?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#130292 Oct 17, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course we can. How can anything that exists not be natural? Everything that exists is nature, and subject to natural law. That's by definition.
<quoted text>
"Supernatural" is as empty and meaningless a word as "juxtanatural" or "infranatural."
If there were a god it would be just as natural as anything else, and subject to natural law. A god couldn't exists without being subject to natural laws that allow it to exist.
You're arguing that the universe needs a god because it is too complex to have self-organized, but that the even more complex designer god doesn't need its own designer god because [fill in the blank].
Such an argument is the logical fallacy called special pleading. You grant the god the ability to have properties that you refuse the universe for no good reason.
We have to explain it all, whether god plus universe, or godless universe alone - or else accept that some of it is inexplicable. If one can accept that an infinitely complex god can exist uncaused or self-caused, then one can accept that universes can, too. All arguments from complexity are similarly doomed.
You played God too long. Got your head warped. That or the drugs.

A physical baby looking at its physical parents and being told they created it would look upon them as a god. One reason children obey for a while.

Then the child thinks God has to follow the same natural laws as it follows.

Take an artificial intelligence, yours will do for an example, and have it start examining itself. It may then determine the parts and interaction of forces that created it. This becomes its basis for determining its existence. It just assembled itself. So everything must follow the same laws and forces that it figured out. Not a thought to what created those parts and forces. Outside its purview. Especially if it interferes with what it may think it desires.

Now, a more advanced artificial intelligence may be programmed with a little extra knowledge and logic to understand it got created somehow, and the parts and forces used were also created. Particularly when it learns to create things by most apparently illogical methods, such as new chemicals and materials out of existing ones, or machines that run on an invisible force. It would just have to suspect there was more to what it was, and how, doing things than meets its eye. Which means there may have been forces beyond what it considers "natural" in its world, to set this all in motion. The potential possibilities. My goodness, one might even think they can do infinite laps on a donut. Unless they took a bite out of it first.

Amazing, you can't believe, after all of your technical skills and dealing with technology, that you can't believe something that created you follows different rules.

You kind of remind me of an electron within a happy dancing bunch of light in a plasma ball thinking it will last forever, and not understanding there is a switch sitting on the table.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#130293 Oct 17, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
Your doubt and unbelief has no affect on my faith.
Catcher1 wrote:
Effect, not affect.
Serah wrote:
Affect 1. To have an influence on or effect a change in. 2. To act on the emotions of; touch or move.
..........
I can see by the meaning in the dictionary that affect was quite suitable in his posting. Effect also fits the posting
Only "effect" is proper. "Affect" is incorrect. Your provided definition is that of a verb. How could it apply? Eagle was looking for the noun, which is "effect." http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/affect-v...

There is also a noun "affect" used in the cognitive sciences, and a verb "effect," meaning to cause to occur. But they are also incorrect in this context.
Serah wrote:
perhaps you should look up meanings before telling people they are wrong.
It didn't help you, did it? There is more to usage than dictionaries. Command of the language comes from reading and writing it extensively.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#130294 Oct 17, 2012
River Tam wrote:
Serah is misinformed. She's here so she obviously is looking for something. Be nice and teach.
Yes, be nice.

But as for teaching, we teach one another, not the Christians. They don't trust us, they don't respect evidence, and they don't trust their own minds.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#130295 Oct 17, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
Your doubt and unbelief has no affect on my faith.

Catcher1 wrote:
Effect, not affect.

Serah wrote:
Affect 1. To have an influence on or effect a change in. 2. To act on the emotions of; touch or move.
..........
I can see by the meaning in the dictionary that affect was quite suitable in his posting. Effect also fits the posting
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Only "effect" is proper. "Affect" is incorrect. Your provided definition is that of a verb. How could it apply? Eagle was looking for the noun, which is "effect." http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/affect-v...
There is also a noun "affect" used in the cognitive sciences, and a verb "effect," meaning to cause to occur. But they are also incorrect in this context.
<quoted text>
It didn't help you, did it? There is more to usage than dictionaries. Command of the language comes from reading and writing it extensively.
"Affect" would be quite proper if you substituted
influence" for it.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#130297 Oct 17, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>We each believe that which we believe and that which is inherent within us. As I seek to become closer to GOD, some clearly don't even know him. Francis Collins is a brilliant scientist, and clearly believes in GOD ~ Faith is definitely in the equation; no red flag needed. Cheers, I do believe that your belief in atheism requires as much Faith as to believe in GOD ~ no red flag needed :)
So what part of atheism requires faith?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#130298 Oct 17, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
Atheistic mind:
Self centered and self elevated. Always believes they are more intellectual than the really are. Enjoy admiring themselves. What they say is absolute truth. Why?, because they said so. What you say does not matter. Why?, because you said it.
Vain to the center core of their belief. Their overly important self rises above all who challenge them. Arrogantly smug and their overly inflated self worth. Always in the indictment mode. Pointing the finger is a mainstay. All their accusations are true. Why?, because they said so, that makes it true.
Their sense of self exceeds the limits of what is normal. Narcissism has permeated into the root system of their mind. Channeling throughout their innermost recesses of their being. Mindlessly conceited and copiously self important to the degree of absurdity.
Admiring self and ones fanciful self absorbed and imaginary talent. Their wisdom is elevated by their superior high mindedness. They have obtained greatness in their own mind. They are their number one fan. Self rule and self guidance they navigate through life by self induced pride.
The atheistic mind is all about being self centered.“There is no god,” they say. Because they see no evidence in their inward looking self diagnostic analysis of self. Self being the center of the universe according to the wisdom of self.
Other than the part where an atheist might claim their is no god, you described what I see in many if not most Christians.

You believe you are so superior, you have some special purpose outside of this world and will live for eternity.

You insist a god absolutely exists even when their is not one shred of evidence. How hubris is that?

You insist your particular god is the only real god. Again, arrogant as it gets.

You insist if we do not believe as you, we go to hell to be tortured for eternity. Damn, that is harsh.

Not sure if an atheist can even get that arrogant.
rider

Gwinn, MI

#130299 Oct 17, 2012
Olbermann on Bush Rose Garden Press Conference 09/18/06 ...

&#9658; 8:18&#9658; 8:18 www.youtube.com/watch...
Sep 18, 2006 - 8 min - Uploaded by spamcrater
(From Crooks and Liars) Countdown's Keith Olbermann's 09/18/06 special commentary on President Bush ...

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#130300 Oct 17, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Only "effect" is proper. "Affect" is incorrect. Your provided definition is that of a verb. How could it apply? Eagle was looking for the noun, which is "effect." http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/affect-v...
There is also a noun "affect" used in the cognitive sciences, and a verb "effect," meaning to cause to occur. But they are also incorrect in this context.
<quoted text>
It didn't help you, did it? There is more to usage than dictionaries. Command of the language comes from reading and writing it extensively.
I thought about providing an explanation.

But I decided it would fall upon deaf ears.

Thanks anyway.

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#130301 Oct 17, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
Eagle12 wrote:
Your doubt and unbelief has no affect on my faith.
Catcher1 wrote:
Effect, not affect.
Serah wrote:
Affect 1. To have an influence on or effect a change in. 2. To act on the emotions of; touch or move.
..........
I can see by the meaning in the dictionary that affect was quite suitable in his posting. Effect also fits the posting
<quoted text>
"Affect" would be quite proper if you substituted
influence" for it.
How stupid is that?

BWAHAHAHAHA.

A green dress would be quite nice if you wore a blue one instead.
peal

Mountain View, CA

#130302 Oct 17, 2012
let all get a long

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#130304 Oct 17, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
Eagle12 wrote:
Your doubt and unbelief has no affect on my faith.
Catcher1 wrote:
Effect, not affect.
Serah wrote:
Affect 1. To have an influence on or effect a change in. 2. To act on the emotions of; touch or move.
..........
I can see by the meaning in the dictionary that affect was quite suitable in his posting. Effect also fits the posting
<quoted text>
"Affect" would be quite proper if you substituted
influence" for it.
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
How stupid is that?
BWAHAHAHAHA.
A green dress would be quite nice if you wore a blue one instead.
Affect and influence are synonymous. Affect and influence are both proper.

Your stupidity has no affect or influence on me, other than annoyance.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#130305 Oct 17, 2012
Just Results wrote:
<quoted text>
What is not pathetic is how you agonizing athetards will burn in Hell. You continue to show reasons why.
Now KMA, you evil embracing, mentally disturbed atheist.
I am sure you revel in the thought of atheists being tortured in hell. Just as any psychopath would revel in ones pain.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#130306 Oct 17, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought about providing an explanation.
But I decided it would fall upon deaf ears.
.. thanks. Alot ..

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#130307 Oct 17, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =b0NlXKPaqZgXX
Oh yes!

Warren Zevon is one of my most-missed rock stars.

Thanks for that.

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 IB DaMann 40,661
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 8 min It aint necessari... 16,135
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 24 min Thinking 251
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 27 min Thinking 20,599
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 53 min ChristineM 3,765
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 2 hr Thinking 4,673
News Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 7 hr Thinking 24,076
More from around the web