Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 239219 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.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149872 Jan 24, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
:-)
The typical Topix atheist will challenge you to define rationality. Then they will argue about the definition given in the dictionary, stating flatly they are free to define it for themselves as they see fit. Like the term atheism.
They do that a lot. It helps in their logic development process.
To them such is rational.
Most of the arguments I have seen are merely arbitrary claims to knowledge with no rational basis of support...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149873 Jan 24, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
Now,*that* is a circular argument. I claim that the decay of a muon is not caused. That is based on observation and theory. You claim otherwise. But you give no demonstration or evidence of its being caused. Essentially, you are assuming every event has a cause. And *that* is a circular argument.
<quoted text>
Like I said, most quantum level behavior is uncaused.
Which version of quantum theory are you presenting?

If something decays, it means it has a prior condition.

Now you can claim that such decay is evidence of a lack of a cause, but that would seem to be very illogical...

So despite this muon (which is questionable), do you have any example of anything else that does not have a cause.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149874 Jan 24, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, good. We are making progress.
Now, I had previously shown that there was no life at some point in the past. I note that there is life now.
Take the *earliest* life. Either it was uncaused, or it had a cause. I discount the first possibility because life is not a quantum level phenomenon (although you might be able to argue this point---it would give another example of an uncaused event, though).
So this earliest life had a cause. That cause had to be previous to the earliest life. That means the cause could not be alive (if it were, we would have a contradiction to the *earliest* aspect). In other words, the earliest life had a non-life cause.
There are a couple of ways out of this dilemma for you:
1. Claim that the earliest life did not have a cause.
2. Claim that there was no earliest life, so life has always existed.
The first destroys your 'first cause' claim and the second is contradicted by the conditions of the early universe.
Because you pre-suppose that life was caused by non-life, you have no choice but to arrive at your conclusion...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149875 Jan 24, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
This is part of why I asked you for the definition of the term 'cause'. By all the definitions I have seen for that concept, the decay of a muon has no cause. Perhaps you have a different definition than usual, so I am awaiting your definition of the concept.
Where do you get your assertion that a muon decays without any cause?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149876 Jan 24, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you.
I realize its hopeless but its just down right fun to prove them wrong.
Of course theres always a chance someone reading thats on the fence may be persuaded.
That is always the hope.

Have a look at presuppositional apologetics.

Start with Sye Ten Bruggencate, then move to Dr Jason Lisle and finish with the master Greg Bahnsen.

A week with them and you will have no problem dealing with your average militant atheist...
Pat

Granby, CT

#149877 Jan 24, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Try opening the door.
When he shows up and rings the bell I'll open the door.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149878 Jan 24, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
While that's all wrong. But that's ok we don't expected you to understand. After all you're an atheist.
In other words you will ignore whatever conflicts with your little death denial fairytale.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149879 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So you don't believe non life created life then?
I remain open to things I do not have knowledge of, I know an open mind is a radical concept for a theist to grasp but some of us really have one, honest!

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149880 Jan 24, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Ignorance and censorship are their best allies! Go to just about any 'christian' YouTube and try to vote on their video or make a comment.
"Ratings are disabled for this video."
"Comments are disabled for this video."
OK, you don't want assholes leaving nasty messages, but blocking ratings? WTF? How cowardly can you be? Can't they pray to god for only positive responses? If god can cure cancer, he can certainly stop me from hitting the 'dislike' icon! LOL!
I think you will find that they turn the comments off because of foul mouthed idiots who think that debating an issue is shouting someone else down with vitriolic arbitrary claims to truth.

Most of the atheists I see on forums like this and on the internet, seem incapable of presenting a reasoned rational argument, that does not involve anything outside of ad hominem...

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#149881 Jan 24, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
My parents did not choose me, they chose to procreate.
LMAO!

You're rising the atheist ranks. You might be able to catch up to that Liberty doofus.
Pat

Granby, CT

#149882 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not a matter of evidence.
It is a matter of your pre-suppositions precluding Gods existance.
And yes, you do have pre-suppositions.
Stop lying and making excuses and just provide one fact that distinguishes your god from an imaginary god.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149883 Jan 24, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Your type often hide behind censorship.
<quoted text>
Your type often hides behind vile vitriolic, that shows even a basic lack of respect for anyone who does not agree with you.

Bigotry, I think they call it.

I know that bigotry is common to all men, but some of you militant atheists on here, take it to a new level.

But then, we are in an age where rational thought is discouraged, and most are taught what to think rather than how to think.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#149884 Jan 24, 2013
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
When he shows up and rings the bell I'll open the door.
You don't get it, do you?

Just by you being here & arguing about God (the same God you say doesn't exist - or that there's no proof of), you're "door bell" is ringing....

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149885 Jan 24, 2013
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
I remain open to things I do not have knowledge of, I know an open mind is a radical concept for a theist to grasp but some of us really have one, honest!
So you are open to Gods claims of authority over you life then?

No?

Didn't think so...
Pat

Granby, CT

#149886 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Most of the arguments I have seen are merely arbitrary claims to knowledge with no rational basis of support...
And what the theist death denier offer but a cup full of personal desires and fear. Bravo.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149887 Jan 24, 2013
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop lying and making excuses and just provide one fact that distinguishes your god from an imaginary god.
You are alive.

Even debating with me, proves Gods existence.

Without Him, you have no basis for absolute laws of logic.

By debating and occasionally using reason, you prove His existence...

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#149888 Jan 24, 2013
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
The woman is a CAPTIVE. There is no assumption needed that the process is non-consensual. "You killed my husband/father/brothers and took me as a prisoner...I'd love to marry you!"
The law even provides an instant divorce allowed if the woman does not sufficiently PLEASE him. "If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her."
If this was a consensual marriage, then why would she be considered dishonored?
This is consistent with other laws like Deut 22:28, where a man's punishment for rape is that he must marry his victim. Do you believe a woman would really want to marry her rapist and continue to have conjugal relations with him?
Or Exodus 21:7, where fathers may sell their daughters as wives (again, no consent involved).
<quoted text>
Having an example where the woman is asked does not nullify the examples where the women are clearly not asked.
The term for taking women from a former defeated enemy is called War Brides.

If a man is attracted to her and wants to have a loving relationship. Then he must treat her exceptionally well. You know, diamond rings, access to the credit cards, a nice Lexus to drive, nice home, nice clothes with servants. Of course Im speaking metaphorically.

Nothing has changed since then. In fact after the defeat of Germany in post WWII. War brides were not that uncommon. Thousands of German women were married to American Servicemen and were transported to the USA. The same was for the Japanese.

Because War Brides, occurred in the scripture the Atheist opposition think it was just an awful atrocity. These women wanted a chance to survive and not die in the rubble left behind. A radical change no doubt and heartbreak but life goes on.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#149889 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you will find that they turn the comments off because of foul mouthed idiots who think that debating an issue is shouting someone else down with vitriolic arbitrary claims to truth.
Most of the atheists I see on forums like this and on the internet, seem incapable of presenting a reasoned rational argument, that does not involve anything outside of ad hominem...
If you would have read my post, you would have seen that I acknowledged that and ask, why then block the ratings?

If you cannot read and comprehend my simple posts, how are you to be trusted on biblical matters? master greg bahnsen failed with you!
Pat

Granby, CT

#149890 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Because you pre-suppose that life was caused by non-life, you have no choice but to arrive at your conclusion...
All you do is project the closed mindedness of the theist who blindly beleives in magic with zero proof onto the rational thinking atheist.

The god question is irrelevant because we will die like all others before us, not knowing. What is relevant is that life after death is a lie for we know memory and awareness are brain functions and we know they cease upon death no different than your blood will stop flowing when your heart stops beating. A corpse is conclusive proof of this. This is why you cling to your phantom god, you can not cope with death like a mature adult, instead you play make believe like emotionally stunted little children.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#149891 Jan 24, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You are alive.
Even debating with me, proves Gods existence.
Without Him, you have no basis for absolute laws of logic.
By debating and occasionally using reason, you prove His existence...
Which god? Your god was invented about 3500 years ago.

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
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 5 min Pahu 2,185
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 49 min prophecydotorg 7,469
News New Atheism's fatal arrogance: The glaring inte... 2 hr EdSed 5
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr MikeF 19,046
News Number of Christians Decline 'Unaffiliated' Ris... 2 hr EdSed 5
Holidays 2 hr EdSed 4
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 2 hr Rosa_Winkel 118
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 6 hr ChristineM 7,410
More from around the web