Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 239180 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.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#151856 Feb 4, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
What evidence?
All evidence derived from Discovery of the chemical origins of organic matter or the building blocks of life, Earths Geologic History, The Fossil Record, RNA/DNA,and The evolution of the biosphere itself.
bohart

Newport, TN

#151857 Feb 4, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
All evidence derived from Discovery of the chemical origins of organic matter or the building blocks of life, Earths Geologic History, The Fossil Record, RNA/DNA,and The evolution of the biosphere itself.
Looking, looking, nope absolutely zero empirical evidence.Damn you tell a lot of lies. chemicals,matter, geologic history, the biosphere none of that even hints AT HOW DEAD INANIMATE MATTER CAME TO LIFE ON ITS OWN!

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#151858 Feb 4, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you do.
To state any moral position is flawed requires you to substantiate your standard of judgement.
To refuse to do so is to admit the inability to do so.
I can critique your morality because I can account for absolute morality.
You cannot, so should not critique anothers position.
Until you can justify your own position, all you are doing is behaving in an arbitrary manner.
And we both know that is illogical.
By refusing to account for your own standard of absolute morality, you prove you cannot.
Put up or shut up...
No. You don't have to know all the answers to point out failure.

If x+21=28 and x+42=49.... and the problem was to solve x+64=?

If your answer was either "64,864,953,854" or "purple giraffe"... i dont have to know the answer to see you went wrong here.

Or maybe see it from our perspective...
If you saw my phone bill... and it said i paid $39.99 for 450 min... and i told you my bill shows the truth and i have 1400 min.... this is self contradiction... you don't have to have verizon to know something is wrong here.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#151859 Feb 4, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Looking, looking, nope absolutely zero empirical evidence.Damn you tell a lot of lies. chemicals,matter, geologic history, the biosphere none of that even hints AT HOW DEAD INANIMATE MATTER CAME TO LIFE ON ITS OWN!
Oh, if that's your question then here's the evidence:

There was no life, now there is. Non-living matter had to somehow form living organisms.

It's just the "how" that's currently an unknown. No, we won't accept your made up "god dun it" answer, because that's still not an answer to the actual question and it's an assumption.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#151860 Feb 4, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Add biogenesis.
Biogenesis is a truth yes , but it does not explain everything.
Thought it is a truth that nonliving matter does not spring to life, it does not explain origin. Nor does it refute it's having an origin
from nonliving matter. It only explains it is not a continual process. This law was to counter the idea of spontaneous generation,
when it was thought rotten meat generated flies.
So very misused by scientifically challenged individuals who would even deny evolution, which is also a part of biogenesis. Which does encompass these concepts,
Evolution
Mutation
Genetic code
Metabolism
Photosynthesis
Respiration
Carbon cycle
Oxygen cycle
Limiting factor
Ecosystem
.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#151861 Feb 4, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Looking, looking, nope absolutely zero empirical evidence.Damn you tell a lot of lies. chemicals,matter, geologic history, the biosphere none of that even hints AT HOW DEAD INANIMATE MATTER CAME TO LIFE ON ITS OWN!
The phrase DEAD INANIMATE MATTER doesn't make sense, and neither do you. Do you think carbon atoms are alive?

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#151862 Feb 4, 2013
trekx wrote:
<quoted text>
Actuality no i check all my facts, and if i am wrong i will admit it, its just your bias/religion that wont allow you to see the truth. And BTW there have been wars for thousands of years not just the couple hundred years you posted and though out those thousands of years the majority where religious wars ...
But really Atheism is more then this. Lets just put it this way, to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion. But to be an Atheist you dont have to be taught anything at all, its just a natural state of mind and the way we are all born ...
The majority of wars were over territorial disputes. It even happens between neighbors when one puts up a fence. One side claims the fence is extended onto their side of the property. Next thing you know there is a dispute that leads to war.

{to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion}.

If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#151863 Feb 4, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Biogenesis is a truth yes , but it does not explain everything.
Thought it is a truth that nonliving matter does not spring to life, it does not explain origin. Nor does it refute it's having an origin
from nonliving matter. It only explains it is not a continual process. This law was to counter the idea of spontaneous generation,
when it was thought rotten meat generated flies.
So very misused by scientifically challenged individuals who would even deny evolution, which is also a part of biogenesis. Which does encompass these concepts,
Evolution
Mutation
Genetic code
Metabolism
Photosynthesis
Respiration
Carbon cycle
Oxygen cycle
Limiting factor
Ecosystem
.
I would have a much harder time rejecting evolution if our mail man was an orangutan. Or the New York Cap drivers were baboons. We have similarities to these primates but intellectually we are light years ahead of them.

We are so much different than any species because of our intellect. We can build and create. Beavers can build dams but nothing like Hoover Dam.

Science has yet to answer how life began on the earth and self assembled. RNA and DNA doesn’t self assemble these complicated codes to life. Self creation from sterile material is impossible. It takes a designer or engineer to put the codes together.

If I was an atheist I would be asking how did it all start in the beginning without outside interference. Lots is said about science. But science has not even came close to answering this question.

Since: Feb 13

Riverside , CA

#151864 Feb 4, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
The majority of wars were over territorial disputes. It even happens between neighbors when one puts up a fence. One side claims the fence is extended onto their side of the property. Next thing you know there is a dispute that leads to war.
{to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion}.
If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.
First off read a non bias non religions history book. and second Helen Keller was 19 Months or a year and a half be she contracted an illness that left her deaf and blind. plenty of time for some brainwashing.. And she was able to communicate somewhat with Martha Washington, the six year old daughter of the family cook, who understood her signs; and by the age of seven, Helen had more than 60 home signs to communicate with her family. So your argument is completely invalid, Yes read more than one book you can learn alot ...

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#151865 Feb 4, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
The majority of wars were over territorial disputes. It even happens between neighbors when one puts up a fence. One side claims the fence is extended onto their side of the property. Next thing you know there is a dispute that leads to war.
{to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion}.
If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>

If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.
BS

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#151866 Feb 4, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Gomer. That's a beautiful name. The bible has many:
Nimrod
Dorcas
Jehu
Jethro
Gomer
Gad
Ham
Dodo
I still like Jehu, son of Nimshi.

Earliest citation I know for dangerous driving.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#151867 Feb 5, 2013
Is it ok to rubbish comforting myths? Is it easier to believe in a comforting myth than harsh reality? Just raising the Q for debate.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#151868 Feb 5, 2013
Adam wrote:
Is it ok to rubbish comforting myths? Is it easier to believe in a comforting myth than harsh reality? Just raising the Q for debate.
It depends on how old you are.

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#151869 Feb 5, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Lies.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows...
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#151870 Feb 5, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
It depends on how old you are.
Agree. I think as adults we dont need a security blanket any more.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#151871 Feb 5, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
The majority of wars were over territorial disputes. It even happens between neighbors when one puts up a fence. One side claims the fence is extended onto their side of the property. Next thing you know there is a dispute that leads to war.
{to be religious (any religion) you first have to be taught that religion}.
If this is true then Helen Keller (1880-1968) would have been an atheist. She was both deaf and blind but never drifted to atheism. Living in complete isolation from the world she acknowledged she always knew God was there even before she could communicate.
This anecdote proves nothing - you have no proof of god but you don't even have the decency to stop lying about it to everyone...
Thinking

Gillingham, UK

#151872 Feb 5, 2013
Jehu- product of a jumping Jehoshaphat.
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I still like Jehu, son of Nimshi.
Earliest citation I know for dangerous driving.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#151873 Feb 5, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have a much harder time rejecting evolution if our mail man was an orangutan. Or the New York Cap drivers were baboons. We have similarities to these primates but intellectually we are light years ahead of them.
We are so much different than any species because of our intellect. We can build and create. Beavers can build dams but nothing like Hoover Dam.
Science has yet to answer how life began on the earth and self assembled. RNA and DNA doesn’t self assemble these complicated codes to life. Self creation from sterile material is impossible. It takes a designer or engineer to put the codes together.
If I was an atheist I would be asking how did it all start in the beginning without outside interference. Lots is said about science. But science has not even came close to answering this question.
"If I was an atheist..."

...You're not even close...

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#151874 Feb 5, 2013
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
Agree. I think as adults we dont need a security blanket any more.
471 days from now I'll be old enough to legally buy alcohol in my state of residence.

105 days from now I can no longer be called a teenager.

I still sleep with my stuffed rabbit.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#151875 Feb 5, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
471 days from now I'll be old enough to legally buy alcohol in my state of residence.
I think that just encourages illegal drinking. Here you are legally an adult at 18 and can buy alcohol from then. In fact 16 and 17 year olds can drink at a restuarant if accompanied by an adult.

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
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 2 hr Eagle 12 7,407
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 9 hr MikeF 19,043
why Atheists believe in incest,pedophilia and b... 13 hr Thinking 31
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 14 hr Thinking 2,179
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 23 hr NoahLovesU 7,468
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists Mon thetruth 115
News .com | What hope is there without God? May 20 Kaitlin the Wolf ... 26
More from around the web