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: Apr 09

Location hidden

#150204 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Silly.... Jesus still has about 2.2 billion "associates".....
Rather like a pyramid scheme...

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#150205 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Another atheist lie?
What would the lie be?

Point it out.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#150206 Jan 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you also have those that believe this material existence we are experiencing just popped out of nowhere. No ultimate cause, just a cloud of smoke that condensed and "poof!", here were are.
Still waiting for the proof such can be done on the physical level, and not in the imagination using numbers.
Are you waiting to see another universe created?

What is obvious is that a universe can exist. We don't need to prove that it does or can. What isn't obvious is how. A god is only hypothetical answer to the origins problem.

But not a good one. All god hypotheses create a more intractable problem than they solve. They leave a god to be accounted for. It seems that something must either have existed eternally or to be self-created. What is the least likely thing to exist uncreated and undesigned?

[a] A singularity
[b] An amorphous multiverse
[c] an infinite, immortal, sentient, volitional, omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly moral being

Virtually every argument against simpler things existing undesigned, such as causality (cosmological argument) and irreducible complexity (teleological argument), are even stronger arguments against a god existing undesigned.

The person of faith generally invokes special pleading. For example, the universe, it will be said, absolutely, positively needs a first causes, and anybody who thinks otherwise is irrational. The naturalistic explanations are mocked with words and phrases like "poof!" "nothing exploded and made everything," and "rain on a rock turned into life"

But the god gets a pass from such rigorous scrutiny - often excused by some ad hoc qualifier such as that the god exists in a privileged reality where nothing needs to make sense. The will to believe permits that.

You just mocked choice [a], the idea of a singularity existing and expanding to become our universe. You no doubt want us to choose option [c].

Sorry, but whatever argument you can level at naturalistic choices, the same argument destroys any god hypothesis.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#150207 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Your room can be measured & observed in many ways. So can the elephant.
If you can determine a way to measure God, then you can determine if He's there or not.
Until that happens, none of you can honestly say that God is in our minds & only in our minds.
You can only believe that.
So you acknowledge that there is as much possibility that the god Zeus exists as there is the god of the bible.

That's a good start...

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#150208 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Your room can be measured & observed in many ways. So can the elephant.
If you can determine a way to measure God, then you can determine if He's there or not.
Until that happens, none of you can honestly say that God is in our minds & only in our minds.
You can only believe that.

There is no indication it's anywhere else, so why would we think it was. Besides someone saying it is, which is the same as saying there is a IPU in your bedroom.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150209 Jan 26, 2013
I don't have a sister so as usual you are looking rather....
Serah wrote:
<quoted text>As if I would click on your link, Prince Charming? I guess it is your sister your are talking of, can't be mine, can it?
Imhotep

United States

#150210 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Silly.... Jesus still has about 2.2 billion "associates".....
Sillier!

Allah has 1.5 billion slaves
Jesus has 1.1 catholic dogma addicts and 1.1 non catholic slaves

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adheren...

Christian: 2.1 billion
Islam: 1.5 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/ Atheist: 1.1 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
Buddhism: 376 million
primal-indigenous: 300 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 15 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha'i: 7 million
Jainism: 4.2 million
Shinto: 4 million
Cao Dai: 4 million
Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
Tenrikyo: 2 million
Neo-Paganism: 1 million
Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
Scientology: 500 thousand

What was your point? A sucker born every nano second?

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150211 Jan 26, 2013
Oh I certainly agree there are socks posting. But you think none of them are Christians that they are all Poes?
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe that there are far less people on Topix than the number of name suggests; none of them are christian.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150212 Jan 26, 2013
You come here to troll but want to cry when treated as such? You have no moral ground to stand on. I have a friend who is a mod on topix/ chicago tribune we met while campaigning for Obama. I have advertised on topix before and will again.

Good luck with that troll :)
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I want you to stay.
However, abuse that you so flagrantly practiced will not be tolerated any longer.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150213 Jan 26, 2013
There is no way you have a high school level education. Just no effig way.
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Next time a spouse or family member of yours experiences a migraine headache. Tell them they’re delusional and the pain is imaginary and in their head. Explain to them your not experiencing a migraine so theirs is not real.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#150214 Jan 26, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you waiting to see another universe created?
What is obvious is that a universe can exist. We don't need to prove that it does or can. What isn't obvious is how. A god is only hypothetical answer to the origins problem.
But not a good one. All god hypotheses create a more intractable problem than they solve. They leave a god to be accounted for. It seems that something must either have existed eternally or to be self-created. What is the least likely thing to exist uncreated and undesigned?
[a] A singularity
[b] An amorphous multiverse
[c] an infinite, immortal, sentient, volitional, omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly moral being
Virtually every argument against simpler things existing undesigned, such as causality (cosmological argument) and irreducible complexity (teleological argument), are even stronger arguments against a god existing undesigned.
The person of faith generally invokes special pleading. For example, the universe, it will be said, absolutely, positively needs a first causes, and anybody who thinks otherwise is irrational. The naturalistic explanations are mocked with words and phrases like "poof!" "nothing exploded and made everything," and "rain on a rock turned into life"
But the god gets a pass from such rigorous scrutiny - often excused by some ad hoc qualifier such as that the god exists in a privileged reality where nothing needs to make sense. The will to believe permits that.
You just mocked choice [a], the idea of a singularity existing and expanding to become our universe. You no doubt want us to choose option [c].
Sorry, but whatever argument you can level at naturalistic choices, the same argument destroys any god hypothesis.
"naturalistic choices"

What makes you think they were "natural" before they started? It seems natural to you because you are made of it.

Jeez, IANS, you are limited on your perspectives.

Simple facts.

You believe you are existing now. Having an experience.

We have ascertained things like atoms and DNA, building blocks, AND PATTERNS, of energy transfer and propagation. All follow basic laws related to motion and reaction to motion. EM is real good about that.

A chance expansion of some assumed thingy in the beginning will not create those laws universally unless it was pointed in the right direction. Try to figure how the spin of atoms and EM can all be in the same relative direction can be accomplished by the collapse of the original mysterious material expanded from a central point, meaning outwards in all directions.

Something set this stage and all of the actors in it. This physical manifestation is an expression of an intelligence, if you consider yourself intelligent, from another plane. A bipolarity was created that produced an energy which was then harnessed to accomplish ends. We do that all of the time with electronics, which, BTW, you can't see the energy, just the effects of it.

If you think, you are. If you are, something made you.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150215 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, my friend.
I got to thinking about this a bit more. Of *course* absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It may not be *conclusive* evidence of absence, but it certainly is evidence. Furthermore, why is it not conclusive? Because you may not have looked in the correct places, or with the correct means, etc. But if you have looked extensively, and by a variety of means, then the prolonged absence of evidence *is* evidence of absence that increases in quality for each new way of looking and number of times looked.

As an example, there is a law of physics: the law of conservation of mass/energy. The absence of evidence that this law is violated after many and repeated attempts (perpetual motion machines, for example) is, in fact, evidence of absence. Given the number of ways we have looked and the strictness of the law (hence the high degree of testability), the prolonged absence of evidence of violations is very, very good evidence for that law.

So the question then becomes at what point does absence of evidence become strong evidence of absence? Well, we have to have searched in many different way and over a long period of time. We have to have searched in ways that, if the existence was true, we would have found evidence.

So, lets do this: what precise search method that is public and independently verifiable will lead to the detection of a deity? This method should give a different answer if there is no deity than if there is one (or many) and should be such than even an unbeliever will be able to observe the evidence as unambiguous evidence of existence.

If no such method exists, then the default position is the non-existence, just like it would be for Bigfoot, a supersymmetric particle, or an elephant in my room.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150216 Jan 26, 2013
And god is nothing more than a figment of the imagination.
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
There’s truth in what you are saying. Many faiths that include idol worship is indeed man made. Throughout history mankind has reached out to a higher order but often created their own God and religion.
Pat

Granby, CT

#150217 Jan 26, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I like cheese.
Cheeses saves!

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150218 Jan 26, 2013
Lol! Sheer awesomeness! Thanks so much!:)
scaritual wrote:

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#150219 Jan 26, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Oh I certainly agree there are socks posting. But you think none of them are Christians that they are all Poes?
<quoted text>
With at least 70% of America being believers, that would be an ignorant assumption. There maybe some computers are the devil christian cults, but i think they are smaller than the
christian got a sock on topix cult.
heheheh

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150220 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Your room can be measured & observed in many ways. So can the elephant.
If you can determine a way to measure God, then you can determine if He's there or not.
Until that happens, none of you can honestly say that God is in our minds & only in our minds.
You can only believe that.
But the default position *would* be that it is only in your minds. Furthermore, it is *your* burden of proof as a believer to provide the evidence and the method of measurement. The very fact that you claim God cannot be measured in any way *is* evidence of absence also.
Pat

Granby, CT

#150221 Jan 26, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
My good man I have no proof for you but I have plenty for myself.
God can’t be proven but he can be experienced.
Drunk on cheeses are you?
Pat

Granby, CT

#150222 Jan 26, 2013
He is Coming Soon wrote:
www.scribd.com/doc/31322017...
Have a nice forever!
Your id is the name of a porn flick, how appropriate. Two different flavors of smut using the same name! Praze be to cheeses!

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150223 Jan 26, 2013
Apologetic nonsense. Saying that the stoner who wrote revelation was a child at Jesus' feet is pure wild speculation and shaping the myth to make it fit. And Jesus didn't say some of you will not taste death before having a vision of this he said these things WILL happen.

Do read the bible sometime ok retard? You will at least sound halfway intelligent. Unlike your made up story of your dad converting because an Arab went into his hospital room.
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
You’re making progress because now you are acknowledging that “some” would not taste death. Your previous statement was “all.”
That “some” was John the Revelator. John had a vision of the future. I realize that you will never acknowledge that John was who Jesus was talking about because this fact is contrary to your ideology. John saw visions of the end times and this is what Jesus was referring too when he said,“some.”
I have made known the opposing view and thank you again.

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) 18 min ChristineM 1,454
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 59 min J RULES 23,252
Christians More Supportive of Torture Than Non-... 1 hr Reason Personified 10
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 8 hr Even Steven 2,607
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... 9 hr Richardfs 166
God' existence 11 hr polymath257 84
Is 'naturalism' a bleak philosophical outlook? ... 15 hr Mikko 5
More from around the web