Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258482 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.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149664 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
The laws of logic, morality and uniformity reveal the character of God...
That is a claim I have seen many times, but I have never seen it actually supported.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149665 Jan 24, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
A rock is more useful.
Yes, if you want to hide behind it so God can't see you.

Just like Adam and Eve in the Garden.

Man still attempts that foolishness to this day.

Except these days, it is no longer a bush, but a rock.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#149666 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the atheist wants to present the godidit argument as invalid whilst retaining the rockdidit argument as valid.
I am making the Transcendental Argument for the existance of God.
You can of course match that and make the transcendental argument for the creative powers of rocks if you want, but that might be a tough one...

What you try to do is make illogical, logical.
It doesn't work.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#149667 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, and you observed all of that?
Where did law come from by the way?
Was there a point where "law" did not exist?
First of all the fundamental forces of the universe are human observations of the behavior of matter and energy/space/time put into words to describe it as laws. Yes there was a point where there was no potential difference existed between matter/energy/space/time.
Since space/time did not exist the question doesn't make sense.
Absolute zero is the point before the universe and where the physical laws do not apply. Since time does not exist then, there is no time before then. Since there is no time before then, no law can exist before then.

So far since we cannot duplicate the conditions of all forces unified or GUT Grand Unification Theory, it remains a paradox. Though several theory's try such as super string and quantum loop gravity all being considered to be attempts at Theory Of Everything models or TOE . All are simply where the laws of physics break down and no longer exist.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149668 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
This post was caused by you.
Therefore it has a cause...
Unless you think it didn't?
That is not a *definition* of the term 'cause'. It is an example of the term in usage. So, we agree that by any reasonable definition, I caused this post. Am I the only cause?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149669 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know if a line is curvy?
Compute the second derivative?
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#149670 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
For those stateside, just wish to point out, people from Lincoln are generally inbred and arrogant :D Inbreeding is rife there. Its like a religion :D

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#149671 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
One of your own team members disagree with you...
Are you saying they are a primitive or savage?

Team members? I am on no team, if you mean people who use science as a rational way of explaining the world and universe, then you simply mean people who are guided by knowledge, vs those who are guided by superstition.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#149672 Jan 24, 2013
Just to clarify I mean mtimber is from Lincoln, inbreeding capital of the UK :D

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149673 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet you understand there is a concept called eternal.
How do you account for that?
It is a concept that humans made up to mean 'for all time'. it was then distorted by the religious apologists to be independent of time, thereby negating its meaning.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#149674 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
If God was outside of time and space, as He created it, then He would have to reveal that fact in some form.
To do this, He has shown, through prophecy, that this is the case.
It is a logical conclusion.
1. To prove God is eternal, He has to show knowledge that He operates outside the bounds of time.
2. God reveals the future through prophecy, operating outside of time.
3. God proves He is eternal.
Second Part:
1. The universe had a start, a first cause that was not of the universe.
2. That first cause has to show that it is outside of time.
3. God has shown He is outside of term and therefore the first cause.
This last step does not follow, even if you accept all the rest of the steps. You are making an assumption that there is only *one* thing that is 'outside of time'. But you have not demonstrated that.
Plenty of evidence that God is the Creator, using very simple logic.
God presents His own argument here:
Isa 42:8 I [am] the LORD: that [is] my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
Isa 42:9 Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.
That isn't evidence. That is a quote from an old book that was written to control the ignorant.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#149675 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
If God was outside of time and space, as He created it, then He would have to reveal that fact in some form.
To do this, He has shown, through prophecy, that this is the case.
It is a logical conclusion.
1. To prove God is eternal, He has to show knowledge that He operates outside the bounds of time.
2. God reveals the future through prophecy, operating outside of time.
3. God proves He is eternal.
Second Part:
1. The universe had a start, a first cause that was not of the universe.
2. That first cause has to show that it is outside of time.
3. God has shown He is outside of term and therefore the first cause.
Plenty of evidence that God is the Creator, using very simple logic.
God presents His own argument here:
Isa 42:8 I [am] the LORD: that [is] my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
Isa 42:9 Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.

Sorry circular reasoning and psychological evidence, are not tangible or even demonstrable. They only exist in a fallacious
way.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149676 Jan 24, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
What you try to do is make illogical, logical.
It doesn't work.
Arbitrary appeal to your own authority.

Do you have a rational argument to present?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149677 Jan 24, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a claim I have seen many times, but I have never seen it actually supported.
It is a philosophical argument.

You don't accept philosophy as a valid practice.

So you won't understand the argument anyway...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149678 Jan 24, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
Yes there was a point where there was no potential difference existed between matter/energy/space/time.
Do you have the empirical data from the observations you made whilst you were there watching all this unfold?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149679 Jan 24, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
That is not a *definition* of the term 'cause'. It is an example of the term in usage. So, we agree that by any reasonable definition, I caused this post. Am I the only cause?
Nope.

God caused you.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149680 Jan 24, 2013
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
For those stateside, just wish to point out, people from Lincoln are generally inbred and arrogant :D Inbreeding is rife there. Its like a religion :D
I am sure everyone in Lincoln will be warmed by your atheistic empathy for them...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149681 Jan 24, 2013
Adam wrote:
Just to clarify I mean mtimber is from Lincoln, inbreeding capital of the UK :D
Am I?

Wow, must have moved cities in my sleep...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149682 Jan 24, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a concept that humans made up to mean 'for all time'. it was then distorted by the religious apologists to be independent of time, thereby negating its meaning.
So how do you account for the concept that many have that there was state where there was no time?

Your reduction to absurdity is incredible to watch...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149683 Jan 24, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry circular reasoning and psychological evidence, are not tangible or even demonstrable. They only exist in a fallacious
way.
Arbitrary appeal to your own authority.

Do you have a rational argument to present?

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) 33 min replaytime 83,181
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 10 hr Science 2,576
High School Atheism Nov 14 Reason Personified 3
Reasoning with Insanity (Jun '16) Nov 14 Reason Personified 106
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Nov 14 Eagle 12 - 3,988
News Tampa Teacher @LoraJane Hates Christians, Promo... (May '17) Nov 6 Frindly 1,175
a prayer of salvation for those who are willing Oct 24 xfrodobagginsx 1
More from around the web