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. Full Story

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#137615 Nov 14, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
If the future is known, then nothing done is choice, it's destined to happen. Destiny is the opposite of free will.
The future is not known to you, therefore you can choose what you want to do. That's free will.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#137616 Nov 14, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't have free will whether there are gods or not.
I don't subscribe to the "proof" that an omniscient god can't be in the same universe as free will. I can say that free will is just an illusion, and an omniscient god cannot exist physically/materially.
If we can say that anything is impossible, anything at all, we can also say that omniscient gods are impossible.
Why don't you think we have free will? Regardless of God or not.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#137617 Nov 14, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
So Catholics aren't Christian? Or do you want a do over half wit?
<quoted text>
Here Homer, do some light reading & shut yer trap:

Question: What is the difference between Catholicism and Biblical Christianity?

Answer: Catholicism and Biblical Christianity are divergent religions. They are built on different foundations, and they propose different ways of salvation.

In principle, Christianity is built solely on the Holy Scriptures, the written Word of God. The Bible is our only infallible rule of faith, being sufficient to give us the sure knowledge of the Gospel for our salvation and holiness.

Roman Catholicism demands submission of the intellect and will to the doctrines taught by the Roman magisterium (the Pope and bishops). It is claimed that the Catholic Church derives its doctrines from the "sacred deposit" found in Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. However the faithful cannot verify these doctrines by referring to the original sources. The Scriptures are inaccessible because only the magisterium is able to establish the authentic meaning. Similarly the contents of Sacred Tradition can only be known through the magisterium. Roman Catholicism is mental and spiritual slavery to the Vatican.

www.justforcatholics.org/a19.htm
Serah

Australia

#137618 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for the reference.
Primates have 48 Chromosomes. We have 46, ok thatís pretty close but potatoes have 46.
Chromosome #2 fused somehow allegedly.
How did it fuse, what caused the fusion? When did the fusion occur?
Evolution supposedly is this slow blending and gradual change.
However a fusion would indicate a sudden change.
You canít gradually fuse a chromosome. I canít image a chromosome gradually fusing, can you? Itís either fused or not. Like a chain, itís linked or not linked. Thereís no gradual linking.
To me the fusing of Chromosome #2 indicates that evolution didnít happen to mankind.
Wonder how long it took for a potato to grow lips?

Or an organism to turn into a male dog, cocking their legs instead of squatting like a female doggy? I have seen female doggies cock their legs, but nothing like the way the male gets his leg right up there!!

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#137619 Nov 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Here Homer, do some light reading & shut yer trap:
Question: What is the difference between Catholicism and Biblical Christianity?
Answer: Catholicism and Biblical Christianity are divergent religions. They are built on different foundations, and they propose different ways of salvation.
In principle, Christianity is built solely on the Holy Scriptures, the written Word of God. The Bible is our only infallible rule of faith, being sufficient to give us the sure knowledge of the Gospel for our salvation and holiness.
Roman Catholicism demands submission of the intellect and will to the doctrines taught by the Roman magisterium (the Pope and bishops). It is claimed that the Catholic Church derives its doctrines from the "sacred deposit" found in Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. However the faithful cannot verify these doctrines by referring to the original sources. The Scriptures are inaccessible because only the magisterium is able to establish the authentic meaning. Similarly the contents of Sacred Tradition can only be known through the magisterium. Roman Catholicism is mental and spiritual slavery to the Vatican.
www.justforcatholics.org/a19.htm
Adjective: divergent
1. Diverging from another or from a standard
2. Tending to move apart in different directions

WordWeb Pro 6.0

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#137620 Nov 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you think we have free will? Regardless of God or not.
Any decision we could possibly make is determined by knowable factors, and is therefor predictable. If our behavior is predictable, we are not free in our choices, they are constrained by these knowable factors. It's possible that there might be random elements involved in the decision making process, but there will always be some quantity of time between a random event and the effect it has on the decision making process. That time interval allows for all necessary information to be available for computation, which then gets us back to predictability.

Where is the freedom, if all your decisions could be made by computation of the factors that contribute to your decisions? Your brain is the computer that does this. What you think of as free will is just the culmination of complex factors being computed by your brain, and appearing to your conscious mind as a free choice.

I would argue that omniscience is impossible, however, it is possible to follow and predict human decisions. There is no logical barrier there that would prevent this from happening. It's a technological problem. I doubt we will ever be able to do this with 100% accuracy, but it isn't impossible.

To recap, when humans decide something, they are computing based on available information and also being influenced by the state of the body they reside in. Chemicals and stuff like that have an effect, as do temperature, altitude, time of day, all sorts of things. All of this is so complex that we have the illusion of free will, but we are not truly free.
Serah

Australia

#137621 Nov 14, 2012
***A group of archaeologists now contend it was indeed symbolic - but not religious symbolism, it was more political.

The Stonehenge Riverside Project (SRP) consortium has spent 10 years exploring Stonehenge and its surrounding landscape along with the social and economic conditions during the monument's main stages of construction (3,000 B.C. and 2,500 B.C.) and have concluded that Stonehenge was built as a monument to show the unity the peoples of Britain after a long period of conflict and regional difference between the eastern and western regions. Its stones are thought to have symbolized the ancestors of different groups of earliest farming communities in Britain, with some stones coming from southern England and others from west Wales.

Bold, social ideas from ancient people, but we also got the Pyramids, the Silk Road and the epic Gilgamesh during that time, so it is entirely believable. Stonehenge may also have been built in a place that already had special significance for prehistoric Britons. The SRP team have found that its solstice-aligned Avenue sits upon a series of natural landforms that, by chance, form an axis between the directions of midsummer sunrise and midwinter sunset.

http://www.science20.com/news_articles/why_wa... ***

***Thousands of people have gathered at Stonehenge to celebrate the summer solstice despite overcast skies.

Cloud cover meant pagans and druids were unable to witness the sunrise following the longest day of the year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshir... ***

***Druids, pagans and revellers cheer as the sun rises at Stonehenge (winter solstice)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/gallery/201... ***

I wonder why they are saying that the rising of the sun for summer & winter solstice was a 'fluke' and yet today, people still gather there for winter and summer solstice?

Is it because they depict man(kind) as more ape like 3600 years BC and without the intelligence required to put together some so very special?
Serah

Australia

#137622 Nov 14, 2012
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>Wonder how long it took for a potato to grow lips?
Or an organism to turn into a male dog, cocking their legs instead of squatting like a female doggy? I have seen female doggies cock their legs, but nothing like the way the male gets his leg right up there!!
Ever seen an ape cock his leg? How long would it have taken to weave that into their genes???

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#137623 Nov 14, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> You are revealing just how _ussified you have become Daveyboy. Man up soldier , you will march uphill day and night .
But only if you have to.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =w-4gs5CvQRQXX
I persevered with no input needed from you. The door works fine.

I still hate working in the cold.

I will be going to bed early.

Now STFU, por favor.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#137624 Nov 14, 2012
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
Adjective: divergent
1. Diverging from another or from a standard
2. Tending to move apart in different directions
WordWeb Pro 6.0
Right. Meaning they USED to be one...

Is this a difficult concept?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#137625 Nov 14, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Any decision we could possibly make is determined by knowable factors, and is therefor predictable. If our behavior is predictable, we are not free in our choices, they are constrained by these knowable factors. It's possible that there might be random elements involved in the decision making process, but there will always be some quantity of time between a random event and the effect it has on the decision making process. That time interval allows for all necessary information to be available for computation, which then gets us back to predictability.
Where is the freedom, if all your decisions could be made by computation of the factors that contribute to your decisions? Your brain is the computer that does this. What you think of as free will is just the culmination of complex factors being computed by your brain, and appearing to your conscious mind as a free choice.
I would argue that omniscience is impossible, however, it is possible to follow and predict human decisions. There is no logical barrier there that would prevent this from happening. It's a technological problem. I doubt we will ever be able to do this with 100% accuracy, but it isn't impossible.
To recap, when humans decide something, they are computing based on available information and also being influenced by the state of the body they reside in. Chemicals and stuff like that have an effect, as do temperature, altitude, time of day, all sorts of things. All of this is so complex that we have the illusion of free will, but we are not truly free.
Do you have any examples?
Thinking

Dalry, UK

#137626 Nov 14, 2012
Clearly god wants you to freeze.
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
I persevered with no input needed from you. The door works fine.
I still hate working in the cold.
I will be going to bed early.
Now STFU, por favor.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#137627 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are a scientist and you come out publicly that you donít believe in macro evolution.
That's not a sentence, dolt.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#137628 Nov 14, 2012
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. will give CATCHER 2-1 odds that Eagle can catch it ..
.. COME ON EAGLE, do your thing! Find the error so CATCHER has to loan another $50 to KIVA ..
Ha!

If Eagle catches the error, I'll lend $100 to KIVA.

Make it $150.

The guy couldn't catch a bug if it flew into his mouth.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#137629 Nov 14, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
I persevered with no input needed from you. The door works fine.
I still hate working in the cold.
I will be going to bed early.
Now STFU, por favor.
Buenas noches.

Do you know what an iman is?

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#137630 Nov 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have any examples?
Examples of what?

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#137631 Nov 14, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not a sentence, dolt.
Mes thin you done know a damn thin senor.

You a dumb sh** senor Pedro, dumb.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#137632 Nov 14, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Tim, thereís more to the story. The California Courts have sided with NASA. NASA claims he was let go because of his performance.
A leading scientist placed in charge over a entire team, who had been with NASA 15 years is fired over performance?
He had obviously had some bitter enemies and the working political work environment worked against him. His views on evolution may have been the antecedent that resulted in his deteriorated interpersonal relationships.
Well, as a scientist, your performance is to some extent predicated on your ability to separate scientific fact from personal religious belief. It's ok if he wants to have personal beliefs - he can believe in voodoo for all I care - but if those beliefs start to compromise his ability to think objectively, that's a problem.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#137633 Nov 14, 2012
David Coppedge was let go because he was combative and did not keep his skills sharp, not because of his belief that life is too complex to have developed through evolution alone.

And Catholics are Christian, ground breaking stuff for you eh reject?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
"In his lawsuit, Coppedge claimed he was demoted in 2009 and then let go for engaging his co-workers in conversations about his views."
Awesome.
One wonders why the other coworkers didn't fired for expressing their views......

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#137634 Nov 14, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I don't think so. Since I know that prayer works I must conclude that the "testing" being done on prayer is inconclusive. Probably because of the method of testing or the technology used to test.
There was no technology used in the test, it was a study of complications after heart surgery. The methodology was sound, and they had a large sample size. Look it up yourself if you want, it's all over the internet.

Also, don't you think that way of thinking is a problem? You absolutely will not even consider any evidence that conflicts with your beliefs. That's not good.

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
Atheism: On the Rise? (Jan '13) 13 min chris toal 39
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 52 min _Bad Company 200
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 1 hr thetruth 2,598
Evidence for God! 1 hr thetruth 368
Christians More Supportive of Torture Than Non-... 2 hr thetruth 8
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... 2 hr thetruth 162
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 2 hr thetruth 1,451
More from around the web