Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258490 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.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139180 Nov 19, 2012
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Sikhi also asks the same question; "How did u create yourself?"
God is some kind of energy or something like that, i'm waiting for science to figure it out!
How many times do i have to tell u, dear?? huh, how many? God is NOT an old man with a long white beard sitting on a cloud!!!!
Atheists often attribute God with human characterists and/or flaws. They do this so they can pretend to scientifically scrutinize Him. That's why they call Him skydaddy, say He's an old white man with a long white beard & say that He lives in the clouds....

Athitards are cute.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139181 Nov 19, 2012
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Every year, the god of the gaps gets smaller and smaller.
Like your IQ...

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139182 Nov 19, 2012
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
"all mighty God"? Really? Didn't he get stopped by some iron chariots?
Oh, my mistake! I read the 'wrong' part of the bible.
um.... That was Judah.

But I'm sure you already knew that.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#139183 Nov 19, 2012
Thinking wrote:
So god is clean shaven?
<quoted text>
I think the appropriate word is immaculate.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139184 Nov 19, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
We only have evidence that can tell us what happened just after the big bang.
All we can do is speculate about what preceded it. The cyclical models appeal to me, personally.
Everyone has their beliefs.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139185 Nov 19, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
STOP!!! STOP!
OK. You talked me into it.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139186 Nov 19, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>I think scooping up some dirt and blowing on it, and having a fully form man magically appear is much funnier. And if that don't bring you to your knees, how about this fictitious being reaching in and yanking out one of this poor bastards ribs and a funky form women magically paperers, now that a real knee slapper. Notice how much magic is required here.
I'll give you the same advice I give to all who think that things could NOT have happened on there own and needed a magical sky fairy to initiate it..........GO READ A SCIENCE BOOK. Start with anything that explains how stars and planets are formed. Religion has turned your mind to mush, reclaim it before its too late and you turn into someone who, despite looking at the available evidence, claims they are too old to change their way of thinking. EDUCATION is a wonderful thing!!!!
Should we gay an old science book about star formation? You know, back when they "knew" the Milky Way was the universe?

Or should we get a newer one, where they "know" more about gravity & hydrogen?

Or should we wait for a future science book where they'll "know" even more?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#139187 Nov 19, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>The core principal of logic can be expressed as A or NOT A, something either is what it is, or it isn't. It can't be both, it's an exclusionary principle. It's how we understand everything about the universe. There exits only one realm, the naturalistic realm, everything else is speculation. Matter exists, it exists only in the naturalistic realm. The very best evidence suggests that "something" is a much more natural state than "nothing" Nothing appears to be to unstable. Matter, in any form, exists only in the naturalistic realm. Since all indications from cosmologists and astrophysicist say that matter having always exited is a more natural state, then the simple conclusion is that the universe has no boundaries, no edges, it is infinite. As Stephen Hawking says, "The universe simply IS."
Uh huh.

I can see where that would make life easier for you.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#139188 Nov 19, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone has their beliefs.
Are you implying that I "believe" in the cyclical model?

I said "appeals to me" for a reason.

Are you ready to have the conversation about word usage, specifically the word "belief"?

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#139189 Nov 19, 2012
!!!!!!!!

World War Z!!!

Google it!!!!!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139190 Nov 19, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you implying that I "believe" in the cyclical model?
I said "appeals to me" for a reason.
Are you ready to have the conversation about word usage, specifically the word "belief"?
If you like. But all I said was everyone has their beliefs....

Don't be skeered of that word.

I know ateheists fear using the word "belief", but y'all don't hafta.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#139191 Nov 19, 2012
Yes you should gay with an old science book.

Face palm

Oh and Catholics are Christian, sorry but they really are.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Should we gay an old science book about star formation? You know, back when they "knew" the Milky Way was the universe?
Or should we get a newer one, where they "know" more about gravity & hydrogen?
Or should we wait for a future science book where they'll "know" even more?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#139192 Nov 19, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the fool for equivalating collections of atomic particles called biological molecules as something different than collections of metal molecules making a lever.
I thought you believed in abiogenetic evolution?
The body is classified as a machine. Look it up. You think those parts work by magic? Appears so.
Erm, can you learn to spell better? It's really a nuisance trying to figure out what you mean with all these made up words and such. Try spellcheck, computers have that now, you know.

Organic machines function very different from inorganic machines. Not to mention, you religious nuts have an abiogenesis myth, you need to learn what words mean better, especially if you're going to try to debunk something you know nothing about.

Eagle12

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#139193 Nov 19, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>I can't quite understand why you don't understand the difference. Matter exists, It can be examined and tested, looked at from every angle. Don't try and include me in your "faith" based beliefs. Faith is what you need when no evidence is available. I don't have "faith" that matter has always existed, I "trust" what cosmologists and astrophysicists have discovered. Trust is very different from "faith." You want desperately for the acceptance that both Theists and Atheists are in the same boat. Both have "faith" that their beliefs are equal. There're not at all equal. One is based on things found in the naturalistic realm, the other for the supernatural realm, a non-existent realm.
Faith doesn’t have to be religious faith. There’re are some unknowns about the beginning of the cosmos. Physicist will readily admit they don’t know everything about the beginning. Where did the material come from that started the creation of the cosmos? What set off the expansion of the big bang?

What does the Higgs Boson or God Particle have to do with all creation? A lot is not known. One thought that does takes faith. That all this happened by self creation without the hand of framer? With matter always existing and not being created? Sort of a uncontrolled, and undirected explosion of creation.

Buildings don’t build themselves, cars don’t design, engineer, manufactory parts, then self assemble. To not believe in a supreme creator is to believe in happenstance of self creation.

In this world we live in everything is impacted by “Cause and Effect.” To believe all the cosmos self created is to believe in the effect and not the cause. Something caused matter to assemble, caused it to expand, creating stars, planets, the universe. Doctor, you believe in Physics, Physicist, Evolutionist, but you don’t believe in the cause.

It takes blind faith to believe all this was created with no direction, no purpose, and no cause. Happenstance creation, uncontrolled, undirected, unconstrained, and from this all life started?

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#139194 Nov 19, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
If you like. But all I said was everyone has their beliefs....
Don't be skeered of that word.
I know ateheists fear using the word "belief", but y'all don't hafta.
I don't have any beliefs that equate to religious beliefs. In other contexts, I may use the word.

I believe I'm going to have a milkshake. Is this a "belief" like your belief in God?

To avoid confusion, I use words selectively according to context. I find that if I'm accurate and explicit in my writing, I can prevent some of the distractions that arise from conversing with ...um... certain types of people who are easily distracted.(Here I'm being vague to avoid distractions)

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#139195 Nov 19, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Faith doesn’t have to be religious faith. There’re are some unknowns about the beginning of the cosmos. Physicist will readily admit they don’t know everything about the beginning. Where did the material come from that started the creation of the cosmos? What set off the expansion of the big bang?
What does the Higgs Boson or God Particle have to do with all creation? A lot is not known. One thought that does takes faith. That all this happened by self creation without the hand of framer? With matter always existing and not being created? Sort of a uncontrolled, and undirected explosion of creation.
Buildings don’t build themselves, cars don’t design, engineer, manufactory parts, then self assemble. To not believe in a supreme creator is to believe in happenstance of self creation.
In this world we live in everything is impacted by “Cause and Effect.” To believe all the cosmos self created is to believe in the effect and not the cause. Something caused matter to assemble, caused it to expand, creating stars, planets, the universe. Doctor, you believe in Physics, Physicist, Evolutionist, but you don’t believe in the cause.
It takes blind faith to believe all this was created with no direction, no purpose, and no cause. Happenstance creation, uncontrolled, undirected, unconstrained, and from this all life started?
You have no idea what physicists say, you should not pretend you do.

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#139196 Nov 19, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh huh.
I can see where that would make life easier for you.
Eliminating superstition and all things supernatural has its advantages.

Less wasted time.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#139197 Nov 19, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
http://forteana-blog.blogspot. com/2012/11/the-astrophysics-o f-gravity-modification.html
The mainstream theory of gravity sucks.
Sorry, MOND and other modified gravity theories *still* require dark matter to agree with observations. And that is even though MOND and TeVeS have some 'arbitrary wiggle' built into them.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#139198 Nov 19, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Eliminating superstition and all things supernatural has its advantages.
Less wasted time.
Also less time wasted on finding things to hate.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#139199 Nov 19, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Matter appears to exist, to other matter. It is a closed system of energy transfers.
Matter is not "solid". It is the energy that gives the appearance of separation and "solidity". Our space is a foam, if you believe the Big Bang.
You may trust cosmologists and astrophysicists, but I don't believe you understand what they have discovered. Perhaps you have latched onto the projections of some of them to reinforce your religious beliefs, or are drawing your own conclusions of what they have discovered to accomplish that same end.
Forces you can't see drive this existence, not what you see. That includes the assumed four fundamental forces.
Study up on the subject a little more before you speak with such certainty, because you are showing a lack of understanding of the actual physical processes. Your understanding appears very topical.
A little learning is a dangerous thing ;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring :
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.

-Alexander Pope

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) 2 min Into The Night 61,151
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 24 min Messianic114 2,661
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 9 hr IB DaMann 5,970
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 16 hr Science 28,312
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) Wed Eagle 12 452
Deconversion Mar 20 Eagle 12 138
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) Mar 18 Eagle 12 2,043
More from around the web