Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Full story: Webbunny tumblelog

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.
Comments
144,881 - 144,900 of 226,570 Comments Last updated 34 min ago

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150814 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
The existence of absolute moral standards, as evidenced by everyone appealing to them, even if they deny them when it suits, requires an explanation.
And to the extent that such standards exist, they are explained by the simple fact that we are a social species.
That God has revealed them to us, personally, in time, is the evidence required...
Of course you will deny both these facts, but that does not stop them being true...
And you will continue to promote these ideas in spite of their being false.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150815 Jan 29, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
This guy is not too terribly brilliant, but he is playing you guys as if he was.
All that he has done is, taken you {Non-Believers} back to a point that you have to admit that science does not have the answer and then claim god did it.
So far, science cannot tell us how the universe or life was created. mtimber uses that, plus a bit of word twisting, denial, and ignorance and he has you hooked!
You have obviously not understood my argument.

I reject your strawman.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#150816 Jan 29, 2013
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>Agnosticism is lack of knowledge.

Atheism is lack belief.

There is a difference.
Wikipedia:

agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150817 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
The very principle of cause and effect demands absolutes have a cause...
Please state the 'principle of cause and effect' and demonstrate why it applies to moral standards. In particular, please define what it means for one thing to cause another.

the point? I think you are completely wrong here.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150818 Jan 29, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Moral God?
Read the Bible
When a person reads declarations like this, they must always keep in mind that to a zealous Christian, all other belief systems are false by definition.
Nothing moral exists outside of the theological cocoon Christians reside in.
So of course, when these zealots speak of a "belief in and love for God", it must be the Bible God and no other. In other words, unless you believe in and love the Bible God, you can never be "totally" moral.
There are many examples of God's "morals" which are anything but moral according to modern "civilized" societies.
Perhaps the most obvious example of God's questionable morals can be found regarding the issue of slavery.
The Bible God endorsed slavery. That's a fact according to the Bible. Christians however, don't like this to be pointed out about their God so they'll attempt to dilute this ugly fact by claiming that God simply "tolerated" slavery but never endorsed it.
A few quotes from the Bible dissolve this cozy notion and rather lame attempt to wash God's hands of this ugly doctrine.
The Bible God gave instructions on how his chosen people should wage war against their various neighbors:
Deut 20:10-11
When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.
And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries(forced laborers) unto thee, and they shall serve thee.
Notice that if the people of the attacked city accept the "offer of peace" they will become slaves of God's chosen people. Forced labor is slavery.
Deut 20:12-16
And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it:
And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:
But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.
But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
Notice that God instructs his people to completely annihilate nearby nations, killing anything that "breathes", while nations further outside an immediate zone of holiness will have their men killed, their women, children, livestock and everything else taken as plunder by God's chosen people.
Does any of this actually sound "moral" ? This is the same Bible God which Christians say that society must believe in and love in order to have a totally moral society.
Are slavery and mass genocide "moral" just because this deity commanded it?
Read the Bible... It is obvious you enjoy scant knowledge of its contents.
You did not argue a reason for your own morality.

You have just argued you do not like biblical morality, which was irrelevant to the point.

So I will ask you the same question again:

What is your absolute standard of morality upon which you base this claim?
I point to the eternal pre-existing all knowing absolutely moral God.
What do you point to, as an atheist, to support your claim?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150819 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are equivocating a lack of an account for a cause, with a lack of a cause...
No, I am very well aware of the distinction between the two ideas. I am claiming a *lack* of cause as shown by explicit experiments (like Arrow's demonstration) to test general causality.
Hence your argument then permits you to deny causality.
Which of course means denying the process of logic itself.
No, it most certainly does not. Logical derivation has nothing to do with causality. Logic is an abstract collection of methods of deriving truths from previous truths. Causality has to do with how the laws of physics allow one to deduce a later state from an initial state.
Meaning you have argued that a lack of logic is logical.
Which is illogical.
Your lack of understanding of logic is not my problem.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150820 Jan 29, 2013
I have demonstrated it.
The Bible clearly shows that you are lying on this matter.
And as the Bible has shown it can be trusted, then I see no reason to take your word over the truths it clearly reveals.
You do know of God, but you suppress that truth so that you can continue in sin.
You say you don't lie, as if there is an absolute moral value you wish to ascribe to yourself.
Why would you, as an atheist be concerned about that?
You see, you claim to live by atheistic principles of morality, but then you appeal to Christian principles of morality as the defining standard of your character.
Which reveals, that yes, you do know God, but you deny Him as it suits your purpose to...
EmpAtheist wrote:
<quoted text>
Well...... it was fun while it lasted. This response is just as ignorant as the rest of the name callers. Just using enough class to not use words like idiot and retard.
It would be very illogical to know god exists but pretend you dont so you can sin!
I hope you were just having a moment and you haven't lost control.
The point is not whether you agree with my argument, but rather whether you understand why I have made it.

The truth of this argument can also be tested...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150821 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like Richard Dawkins.
Who makes it his purpose in life to persuade people there is no purpose...
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Except for the fact that he never once did that.
YOU may not have a purpose without your god, but don't think that everybody needs a god in order to have a purpose.
It ain't necessarily so.
So how do you conclude as an atheist that there is a purpose to your life?

And what would you say that purpose is?

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#150822 Jan 29, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>I have known some intelligent theists. There have even been some on these forums (Fossil Bob comes to mind). But the vast majority of theists in here show their ignorance and stupidity by criticizing science they clearly do not understand and making arguments that are easily refutable. They also show themselves a danger by wanting to teach their malarkey in the schools and have government institutions fund their churches.

[QUOTE]You have faith in your conviction there are no deities. Or you have a different pathology relating to some need to be contrary."

Or I am interested in finding the truth and showing people that they don't have to be subject to superstition.
You're a Saint.(Kind of ironic)

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150823 Jan 29, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Well...for instance
It's an absolute truth that you're an absolute idiot.
Actually, idiocy is the inability to make a logical reasoning argument.

And as this is merely ad hominem, the charge of idiocy must surely rest at your own feet.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150824 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
All empirical observations are founded on the presupposition of the reliability of the laws of cause and effect.
This is false.
I am not sure where you are going with this one.
Is this another attempt to deny the obvious?
I am attempting to show that things you think are obvious are, in fact, false.
<quoted text>
Why is it false?
Empirical observations are NOT founded on the principle of cause and effect. If anything, they are used to test and limit when such a law is applicable. All that is required for empiricism is that we can make observations, form testable hypotheses about those observations, test them, and change the hypotheses if required.

The point is that 'law of cause and effect' holds when physical laws apply that say that some initial state (the cause) leads to some later state (the effect). But the laws of physics are fundamental here and not all physical laws are of this sort.

In fact, the laws of quantum mechanics are not: they say that from an initial state, all that can be known is the *probability* of different final states with no way *even in theory* to determine which final state will actually come to be. In other words, causality does not always hold. But quantum mechanics is one of the most successful scientific theories of all time. This shows your claim that empirical science is founded on cause and effect to be wrong.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150825 Jan 29, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Society is better than ever all things considered. Sad your cult teaches you to look so negatively at the world.
Leaving aside your clear inability to interact intelligently and compassionately with someone who does not agree with you...

...How can you make such a universal claim about society?

Many would disagree with your assertion...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150826 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you insist on empirical evidence as the only basis for the proof of God?
Do you use that standard in testing all knowledge?
I use the standards of proof within an axiom system for knowledge in the realms of mathematics and logic.

I use empirical evidence for understanding the universe.

So, yes, I do use empirical evidence as the standard of knowledge about anything other than abstract deductive systems.

What other standard of knowledge would you care to use? Faith has shown itself to be incredibly unreliable. Philosophy at best shows some of the possibilities, but tends to mangle the logic so bad that it is irrelevant to any real understanding. Religious texts have to be supported in some other way before they can be relied upon and their basic claims are so unbelievable as to make them suspect from the start.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150827 Jan 29, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>They are scum.
No, they are atheists, who have no basis for morality.

So they can treat people with the most callous disdain, like mocking someones dead sister, with impunity, without breaking their worldview.

But get mighty upset when they are subjected themselves to subjective morality.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150828 Jan 29, 2013
So how do you conclude as an atheist that there is a purpose to your life?
And what would you say that purpose is?
I have purpose in my life because *I* decide to. it's that simple.

My purpose is to love, to learn, to teach, to experience, and to encourage.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150829 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
The Bible clearly shows that you are lying on this matter.
And as the Bible has shown it can be trusted, then I see no reason to take your word over the truths it clearly reveals.
Your problem is in the sentence:'the Bible has shown it can be trusted'. This is a lie.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150830 Jan 29, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
How does a god - or belief in a god - give a life more purpose than it wouldn't otherwise have?
Are you implying that my purpose is to worship it? That's not my purpose - it's the deity's.
As a Christian, your life is devalued and relatively purposeless. In the eyes of your god, you are nothing but a praising machine.
Your purpose - the reason you believe that you were created - is to die and move on to a life of praising some narcissistic black hole of need. In the meantime, you consider the very flesh that you are encased in an your enemy in which you are trapped while awaiting release. You see the world as decadent, and anticipate leaving it, too.
No thanks.
Of course, if God had that character, then what you stated would be reasonable.

Because He does not, it is not...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150831 Jan 29, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they are atheists, who have no basis for morality.
So they can treat people with the most callous disdain, like mocking someones dead sister, with impunity, without breaking their worldview.
But get mighty upset when they are subjected themselves to subjective morality.
The basis of morality is easy: think and care. Both follow easily from our being an intelligent, social species.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#150832 Jan 29, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
"Quantum indeterminacy is the apparent necessary incompleteness in the description of a physical system, that has become one of the characteristics of the standard description of quantum physics."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_indeterm...
Can you understand that, and why it says that most quantum physicists accept the notion that subatomic events occur uncaused?
Please explain why you started with "all physicists" and now have devolved to: "most quantum physicists"?

Also, please supply your source for this amended claim.

Because all I am seeing is a false claim to imagined authority...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#150833 Jan 29, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a Saint.(Kind of ironic)
Nope. merely human.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 58 min Dak-Original 21,530
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 7 hr Thinking 5,921
The Ultimate Evidence of God 11 hr James 68
The myth of the angry atheist 23 hr _Bad Company 3
Our world came from nothing? Mon Patrick 436
It seems there are more Atheists in the Christi... (Jun '13) Mon Patrick 13
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom Sat religionislies 58
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••