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

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149661 Jan 24, 2013
AntiFreakMachine wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think there is rational approach or reasoning - or logic - that you can apply to a god concept that would create special beings with free will. Then; Restrict that free will by demanding we don't use it freely. And; Give us an inquisitive yearning for knowledge that is all around us, then punish us for using either of those things that the god placed there for us to choose from in the first place...by demanding our deaths, or, blind submission to the notion of "don't question it, do as I say".
Stepping away from the deistic concept of omniscience and free will.
Our immediate and current actions may not be the result of free will, like having to crossing terrain, physical limitations, or that we do have to eat and sleep, etc. But, reflecting on those actions and what we did once and what we had little choice in during that first encounter, and will do, allows us to modify how we react to those relatively immutable aspects of physical existence we face. So I think we do have a modicum of free will in that respect.
But, no matter how we may choose to traverse or encounter something in the future, and even currently, if it's a mountain, for instance, we still have to cross it, or go around it, or dig a tunnel through it. If we still must go from point A to B and if the mountain or river is a part of that point A to B trip, we have little free will in that respect.
That's my general view concerning free will, we have very little.
There is a general misunderstanding of "free will" amongst Christians and Atheists.

I have had many Christians disagree with me on this.

It is summed up in this argument:

God has given mankind the choice to rebel.

Not the right to rebel...

So, no, God never gave anyone in the universe the total right to deny His ownership.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149662 Jan 24, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
You let me know if you can teach a rock to think. Logic is not their strong suit.
Interesting, you require intelligence to teach a rock to think?

Sounds like you are making a Creationist argument there...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149663 Jan 24, 2013
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
No, atheists look at a rock and see a rock. They look at god-S and religion-S (in the plural) and understand that these are man made. Simple as.
Not so, atheists look at a rock and see abiogenesis...

“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.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#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.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#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

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#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.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#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...

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
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 2 hr red and right 2,628
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 3 hr ChristineM 5,961
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... 7 hr Richardfs 179
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 8 hr Morse 23,279
faith & pride 9 hr geezerjock 1
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 11 hr _Bad Company 214
Pastor who gave up God for a year after getting... 12 hr thetruth 3
More from around the web