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: Oct 12

Location hidden

#150244 Jan 26, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
All that tells me is that there are lots of deluded humans, actually.
Fine, if that's how u feel, i'll cut your name off the list....i'm sure u don't wanna see a deluded girl, wearing just a hip scarf, belly dancing!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150245 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
But you're missing the point.
There are ways to locate Bigfoot. It has not been discovered even though many many people look for it. All you need is your eyes to see it & any camera to record it.
Same goes for an elephant in your room.
There are no means of analyzing God in the same sense. Your eyes do not see Him. Your ears do not hear Him. Your senses seem to betray you. All known forms of detection fail.
If *all* forms of detection fail, then what does it mean to claim existence?
So does that mean God doesn't exist or you simply lacks the means to detect Him?
if there are *no* methods of detection, then God doesn't exist. Existence *means* there would be some interaction and therefore a method of detection.
There have been billions of people around the world (including myself) that claims to have felt, heard or seen God in various different ways.
Until someone comes up with a way of actually detecting the supernatural or detecting God, an atheists opinion of no God is just that - an opinion, not fact.
But an opinion that is very much supported by the lack of evidence in a supernatural.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150246 Jan 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you can.
The IPU is a single entity. It might be invisible, but you can spray paint it and then see it. The concept of a God is different. It is all encompassing.
Topix atheists lack the ability to understand the difference. They lack the mental vision to see past the physical. Reactive to physical forces only.
They like to beat their mental puds with imagined intellectuality, too.
You are right, we lack the ability to see past the physical. Seeing *means* there is a physical interaction. Even if it isn't with the eyes or skin or tongue, any form of detection means a physical interaction. A complete lack of such interaction is indistinguishable from non-existence.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150247 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't even bother entertaining the idea of an IPU.
Unlike you so-called atheists, on sites like this day in & day out, discussing a God you claim to not believe in.
And the reason we have to discuss this is that there are so many people around us that call us silly or stupid for not believing. There are so many theists that are attempting to make our schools into churches and government into a theocracy. THAT is the basic problem. If you went away and believed and didn't attempt to control everyone else's life, there would be no problem.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150248 Jan 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
As far as deities go, you have human beings that say they can feel the presence of one, or more. Lots of humans, actually. So there is a link to somewhere beyond what you can physically sense. You just ain't found it.
And the interesting thing is that all those who make such claims disagree with all the others who make such claims. Those who experience Allah disagree with those who experience Yahweh who disagree with those who experience Jesus. If *everyone*(or even most) who claimed these experiences agreed with each other, then you might have an argument, although still rather flimsy. But the fact that agreement on religion has been impossible and that it even produces wars and the desire to kill those who experience differently says to me that believers are simply talking to themselves when they experience God.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#150249 Jan 26, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you can.
The IPU is a single entity. It might be invisible, but you can spray paint it and then see it. The concept of a God is different. It is all encompassing.
Topix atheists lack the ability to understand the difference. They lack the mental vision to see past the physical. Reactive to physical forces only.
They like to beat their mental puds with imagined intellectuality, too.
WTF are you to decide the parameters of imaginary, imaginary has no such limits imposed by you. After all,
your god would never survive such imposed limitations.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#150250 Jan 26, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Fine, if that's how u feel, i'll cut your name off the list....i'm sure u don't wanna see a deluded girl, wearing just a hip scarf, belly dancing!
No, no, let's compartmentalize.

One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I'm good with the hip scarf and the belly dancing.

But where do I stuff the hundred dollar bills?

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#150251 Jan 26, 2013
Clementia wrote:
What? Just the hip scarf? but it's cold outside, what if i get a cold?
You can wear as many clothes as you want, before the dance.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#150252 Jan 26, 2013
Which is exactly what we are talking about.
Imaginary limits are subjective to belief, but not to empirical or physical evidence. They require something substantial, the thing theism ignores.

However much psychological evidence you may accumulate within your head.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#150253 Jan 26, 2013
It all boils down to the very argument Nuggin gives, In that belief is the creator of reality .
It takes no more than belief in a god to make a god real.

Now the theist may think this is so.

But it fails the acid test, where you have to actually prove the claim.

Belief does not make the god all powerful.

Demonstration of ability make it it real.
Not the claim.

Get it straight, because anyone can make claim and even deceive you. But reality bites, when the claims are proven.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#150254 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>
I don't think that there is a single christian on here. If there ever is, they write a couple of posts, see that they are not going to sell their religion here, then they beat feet so that they do not have to read those nasty bible verses.
bohart

Newport, TN

#150255 Jan 26, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
As an example there is a law of biogenesis, that life only comes from existing life. The absence of evidence that this law is violated after many and repeated attempts 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 the law.
Thats a great arguement.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#150256 Jan 26, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
Jesus said, or more accurately, was alleged to have said that he would return before all of his immediate associates had died. Jesus declared:

Matt 16:27-28
For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Eagle12 wrote:
There’s a inaccuracy in your statement. First you claim “all” the disciples then you give the scripture reference that says “some.” You contradicted yourself immensely.
Look again:

"before all ... had died"

"some standing here which shall not taste of death"

'Before all die' is the same as 'while some still live.'

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#150257 Jan 26, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
I desperately want another flood but can only afford Global warming. Is it any mystery my name spelled backwards is Dog?
“Due to budget cuts, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse -- previously War, Famine, Pestilence and Death -- are now Sniffles, Hunger Pangs, Flatulence, and Ennui.”– Chris Conway

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#150258 Jan 26, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, no, let's compartmentalize.
One thing has nothing to do with the other.
I'm good with the hip scarf and the belly dancing.
But where do I stuff the hundred dollar bills?
Nowhere if they're fake, but if they're real why can't u just stuff them in the hip scarf?

And i want it in pound notes, English money looks and feels real and it saves me the trouble of going to the bank!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#150259 Jan 26, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
You can wear as many clothes as you want, before the dance.
How many can i wear after?

Why the hell am i even listening to u? It's my dance, my rules!

I say u can wear as many clothes as u want before my dance!!:-p

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#150260 Jan 26, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
If you can determine a way to measure God, then you can determine if He's there or not.
We can test his claim that affect matter:

He promised to answer prayer.
He promised to move mountains for just a mustard seed of faith.
He promised every believer a peace that passeth all understanding
He promised them fruits of the spirit.
He promised to return soon - before the last of his audience died.

They all fail. Your god has kept none of those promises.

We can't test the promises that don't affect matter, such as the promise of an afterlife in heaven or hell, but I'm sure that you can trust that one.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150261 Jan 26, 2013
Well you have to remember he is the retard that said Catholics are not Christian but when asked what the largest Christian church is he responded The Catholic church of course!

No way does he have a high school education there is just no way.
scaritual wrote:
Lol! Sheer awesomeness! Thanks so much!:)
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
http://i1246.photobucket.com/albums/gg601/sca...
<quoted text>
Thanks, I've used it a few times over the past year or so.
Ar Ar thinks it was meant to be real.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#150262 Jan 26, 2013
And yet you live on an atheist forum that does just that.

Wow you idiots are really bad at this ya?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't even bother entertaining the idea of an IPU.
Unlike you so-called atheists, on sites like this day in & day out, discussing a God you claim to not believe in.

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#150263 Jan 26, 2013
Clementia wrote:
How many can i wear after?
Why the hell am i even listening to u? It's my dance, my rules!
I say u can wear as many clothes as u want before my dance!!:-p
Look at what clothing has done to us!

It's evil!

What ever will we do?

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... 19 min Eagle 12 2,177
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 29 min _Bad Company 1,437
God' existence 4 hr polymath257 55
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 4 hr polymath257 112
Is 'naturalism' a bleak philosophical outlook? ... 5 hr Geezerjock 1
Australia: black magic pervert retard 6 hr Thinking 4
Evidence for God! 8 hr ChristineM 366