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. Read more

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#149576 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
People like you look at a rock and see there is evidence for no God.
What presumptive evidence is there in a rock for God?

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#149577 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
The theory of abiogenesis states that life came from non-life.
Abiogenesis is a field of study. There are competing "theories", but no scientific consensus yet.
mtimber wrote:
The simplistic analogy is:
arockdidit
But I think you understand the point already...
That isn't even metaphorically accurate. You want to parrot the "goddidit" argument, which in itself suggests that you realize how fallacious that argument is.

Life either came from non-life, or has always existed. The Biblical Creation myth is also a life from non-life answer. Apparently, in that myth, man was created from clay. I don't know if you interpret that literally or metaphorically, but either way, it suggests an answer of life from non-life.

“Drive by wire”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#149578 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you familiar with the big bang theory?
Do you realise that the laws of the universe had to be suspended for a fraction of time for the expansion to start in the theory?
So, with your reasoning, you would reject the big bang model?
You don't know what you are talking about. You can't put the cart before the horse and expect to get to town. There were no equilibrium and until the formation of matter and energy separated into its different forms there was no basis for the laws as we know them. Though we are starting to understand the forces in the first few seconds , one is sill elusive and beyond our understanding at this point. Superforce or the unification of all forces separated, we see it partly as zero point energy but cannot duplicate or even model it yet. So you don't make sense, no laws were suspended before they settled into equilibrium.

“Drive by wire”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#149579 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
But the logical conclusion of subjective morality, is that when expediency rears its ugly head, rape is an option because it is not absolute wrong...
It is to us because, were are not primitives or savages.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#149580 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
People like you look at a rock and see there is evidence for no God.
I hope you understand the use of arbitrary claims is self defeating?
That was oddly worded.

We look at rocks and see no evidence in those rocks to support a claim that a god exists.

Do you suggest that rocks hold evidence for your god? Does that evidence exclude other gods?

I feel like I'm examining a box of rocks right now.

“Drive by wire”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#149581 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
People like you look at a rock and see there is evidence for no God.
I hope you understand the use of arbitrary claims is self defeating?
I look at a rock and see what kind it is, sometimes I throw them. Other times I put them on her finger.
Bottom line rocks were formed by processes within the Earth, some are more interesting than others.

“Drive by wire”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#149582 Jan 23, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless he is absolutely necessary to retrieve coconuts, he would be risking getting killed in his sleep.
A wise man does not make a woman mad before he goes to sleep with her.
Hey if you alone on that island long enough she will come around huh? heheheh

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#149583 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
To move outside of space and time through special pleading would of course be illogical.
But if that claim was proven, then it would make sense to accept it.
I understand what you are saying but it is a strange point to make. I apologize for using this as an example but I am using it simply so you can understand how it sounds to me. Ex. 2+2=4 but if 2+2 was 7 then it would be correct and we would change the way we do math.

Yeah. I suppose. But as it is illogical now... it sounds ridiculous and it would need to be proven before we start making other conclusions based on that way of thinking.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
If God is eternal, then time is something He is outside of.
If He is outside of time then He can predict what happens in time.
Time isn't a bubble. It is a sequence of events. Once god "does" anything at all... he exists within time. If he interacts or has a single thought or observation... that is time.

God has been pushed "outside of time and space" because it is the only place believers can put him where we can't touch him. The problem is... for something to be said to exist... it is within space and time... which then puts us in a position we do agree on.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Through the revelation of prophecy in the scripture, He revealed Himself and gave man this mechanism to test Him against.
He passed that test, proving that He is outside of time as the Creator God would need to be.
So yes, He has proved Himself to all that are reasonable and open to proof on the matter.
I want to take this from a different angle but i want to address this as if i believed it.

If the tested creates the test we have some big problems. I doubt i have to explain this... but for example.... a magician uses a hula hoop to prove his assistant is floating...

Keep in mind i don't believe god would lie as i don't believe in any gods. I'm just pointing out the problem with the claim

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149584 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you allow that the single cause can be something outside of our normal experience of time energy and matter?
The center of the sun is outside of our 'normal' experience of matter and energy. There are many, many things in this universe that are outside of what most humans would consider to be 'normal'. What, exactly are you attempting to ask?

If it is a cause, then it is in time. That's definitional when considering causality.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149585 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
How does a potter create a pot, which is so unlike it?
How does a human create a car, which is so like it?
The object bears the imprint of the creator but is not equal to the creator.
The universe bears the imprint or God, but is not the same as God.
Yes, we all know that is your mythology. Any actual evidence for this position? Didn't think so.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149586 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You are placing God in His material universe and trying to apply the restrictions of that universe to Him.
That is a bit like putting a car designer in a car, then telling him to forget he is a driver and to act like a car...
And you essentially try to define away any problems by saying 'God is perfect so objections don't apply'.

You have given no reason to believe in a 'first cause'. Even if there was a 'first cause', you have given no reason to think that 'first cause' was an intelligence. Even if there was an intelligent first cause, you have given no reason to think that it was good. Even if that intelligent first cause was good, you have given no reason to think it is in any way related to Christianity.

You are attempting to justify an idea using the conclusions so far down the road that calling it a circular argument seems silly. It isn't an argument at all.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#149587 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, I have been enjoying your reasoned posts.
A refreshing change to the general tide of vitriol from the majority of atheists on here.
Long may it continue.
I feel the same. The name calling gets annoying. For the last 300 posts i have mainly been reading your posts and the responses to your posts.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149588 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I am pointing you to an inescapable logical conclusion.
If you use reason and logic you will come to the same place, but if you surrender reason and logic, you will not be able to arrive at the logical conclusion.
Everything in this universe had a cause, what was that cause?
I deny the premise. In fact, we know many things in this universe that do not have causes. For example, the timing of a nuclear decay.
What caused matter, energy, time, life, reasoning, logic and morality to appear?
Matter and energy may or may not have a cause. If they do, it would most likely be considered to be part of a previous universe or multiverse. Life is 'caused' by chemistry. In fact, it *is* a complex collection of chemical reactions. Reasoning is 'caused' by information processing devices that have mostly evolved and reside inside of skulls. Those devices are called brains. Logic and morality are human concepts that help humans deal with each other and the world around them.
Consider what the first cause would have to be like and the conclusion is quite logical.
A quantum fluctuation?
You can of course deny those things were caused, but that is quite a rabbit hole to explore...
I think the whole concept of causality as applied to the universe as a whole is nonsensical (include the whole multiverse here if necessary).

Let's do it this way. Define the concept of causality. What does it mean when we say that one thing causes another? Using your definition, prove that everything has a cause.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149589 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So if you are not sure how life began and you cannot comprehend it, then by your own admission, you cannot accept that it did happen.
Remember, your standard is that you must be able to comprehend something for it to be true, would you like to retract that?
We know life exists you bozo. Put down your crack pipe for a little while, I think you have had enough.

"Remember, your standard is that you must be able to comprehend something for it to be true"

No, that's your line of bs not mine. If I am open to how life began since we do not know, what "has to be true"?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#149590 Jan 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Hey if you alone on that island long enough she will come around huh? heheheh
If she wasn't a big bull dyke.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149591 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I am pointing you to an inescapable logical conclusion.
If you use reason and logic you will come to the same place, but if you surrender reason and logic, you will not be able to arrive at the logical conclusion.
Everything in this universe had a cause, what was that cause?
What caused matter, energy, time, life, reasoning, logic and morality to appear?
Consider what the first cause would have to be like and the conclusion is quite logical.
You can of course deny those things were caused, but that is quite a rabbit hole to explore...
Yours is an argument from ignorance not logic.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149592 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I am pointing you to an inescapable logical conclusion.
If you use reason and logic you will come to the same place, but if you surrender reason and logic, you will not be able to arrive at the logical conclusion.
Everything in this universe had a cause, what was that cause?
What caused matter, energy, time, life, reasoning, logic and morality to appear?
Consider what the first cause would have to be like and the conclusion is quite logical.
You can of course deny those things were caused, but that is quite a rabbit hole to explore...
Honest people say "I don't know" to things not known, dishonest people say god.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149593 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
People like you look at a rock and see there is evidence for no God.
I hope you understand the use of arbitrary claims is self defeating?
You claim a god then you prove a god or accept you are a liar.

It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him.
-- Abraham Lincoln
Pat

Granby, CT

#149594 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Who said the universe is entirely unlike God?
Gods nature is reflected in His universe.
That is a false premise you have stated.
You know of no god let alone what he has or has not created. You are a dishonest theist, a bs artist no different from a person claiming there are aliens on Pluto with no knowledge to back it up.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149595 Jan 23, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, first explain how you get the concept of evil without God?
Because until you can do that, your question cannot really be answered.
Based on human wants and needs. Good = good for people. Evil = bad for people.

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 Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 17 min Mr_SKY 6,248
News The Consequences of Atheism 1 hr thetruth 1,106
News Atheist monument to counter ten commandments (Jul '13) 1 hr thetruth 14
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr thetruth 17,897
News 'Good without a god': Faces of atheism in Oklahoma (Jul '13) 1 hr thetruth 7,547
News Evolution is a philosophical humanistic religio... 3 hr geezerjock 1
how the athiest created in the world ? 5 hr Thinking 2
More from around the web