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 (Page 7,341)

Showing posts 146,801 - 146,820 of223,214
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152781
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>I am sorry, but your argument that there is no evidence for Jesus is just downright absurd and not one I am even tempted to treat seriously.
We knew that.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152782
Feb 10, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Like virtual particles?
Singing sand.
Showing you don't know what a virtual particle actually is. Or that their effects have been detected.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152783
Feb 10, 2013
 
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
Sin is a man made concept used to control people.
You say that as if it is something wrong...

Are moral laws produced by secularism the same thing?

Obviously they are, so you would then be arguing against those as well...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152784
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
I know you have them.
You know you have them.
You are missing the point.
As an atheist you cannot account for it.
Because you have to deny the self evident truth that you were intelligently created with a spiritual purpose, whilst claiming the right to that purpose.
As a matter of interest, what is your purpose?
We are intelligent beings that are able to plan. That makes our plans have purpose (our specific goals). We also get to plan aspects of our lives, which gives our lives purpose.*We* create the purpose.

No, it is not self-evident that were have been intelligently designed. If anything, it is evident that we are not.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152785
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>The "truth" of God is self-evident to you, and to those who believe as you do, it is NOT at all self-evident to many others including myself. Your problem is that you start with a faulty premiss and then build everything around this premiss. It always comes down to whether or not your beliefs are TRUE. True in the demonstrable way. You have a belief, a belief that can not be demonstrated to be real. I'm sure its very real to you, but you can never convince anyone else that its true without..........OK....the scariest word for all Theists..........Evidence.

I think you need to realize what truth means, When you say "The TRUTH of God" you're i big trouble. It's a wonderful sounding phrase but total bullshit. Here......TRUTH, "That which is true or in accordance with FACT or REALITY. And FACT..."A piece of information used as EVIDENCE....or FACT.."that which is INDISPUTABLY the case. So as you can see, your flowery religious phrase is without merit.

Do you know how childish you sound when you state your beliefs as factual? "You were created by God for a purpose." You can't even prove this mythical being exists let alone has given us a purpose. When you do this, you are making a positive claim, "You were created by God for a purpose." The burden of proof now falls squarely on your shoulders, prove God exists, and then we ca move on to the purpose bullshit. So what was Hitlers purpose, how about John Wayne Gacey, or any number of psychopathic killers? Yeah, Yeah, they had a purpose but ignored Gods recommendations. LOL

Of course I can account for purpose and destiny. Why do you think this is such a huge mystery? I can only feel intense pity for you, unable to navigate through life without an imaginary outside agent, you poor bastard. I decide my pathway through life, I decide my purpose, I control, up to a point, my destiny, not some outside agent. Why is it so very difficult for you to accept that anyone can decide their purpose in life. I personally have devoted my life to the creative arts and passing on what I have learned to others. THIS IS MY PURPOSE IN LIFE. Others have chosen to improve the lives of others by devoting their live to medicine or the sciences.

I can't suppress this knowledge of God when there is NONE. Beyond you holy book, there is NO knowledge of God that is demonstrable within reality.
Well said.

And when you consider that the "purpose" that this god provides is to worship said god, the theists' "purpose" becomes even more absurd and, really, their life becomes a total waste.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152786
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tabby wrote:
The conflict over the principles of evolution has become a religious war. But initiated by the evolutionary side of the argument. It really is no longer about scientific investigation. It's about the evolutionist demonizing any opposing view. Why?
Because if they allow one aspect of their theory to be closely scrutinized it all falls down like a house of cards. Why do you suppose evolutionists run from questions about the very foundation of their belief; How do we get from the inorganic world to the world of the cell? How did the non-living become the living? How can there be a Darwinian theory about life without a theory of how that life began? Therefore, the use of hyperbole and ad hominem attacks.
What atheism is actually at war with, is this fundamental truth:

"In the beginning, God..."

That warfare has been actively engaged in consistently over the last 200 years.

But now, they are no longer just given the free reign to preach it (barring the media and secular school system), because they can be opposed on the internet.

And that, is where the battle really lies these days.

Unfortunately, most arguments in the battle devolve into little more than name calling, often on both sides, which never really gets at the heart of the issue.

Christians should not be drawn into that, as that is a defeat as soon as we engage in that type of behaviour.

Atheists however, lacking any accountable absolute standard of morality, are free, in their eyes, to behave that way...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152787
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

River Tam wrote:
Stop worrying about where you came from and start thinking about where you're going.
So where are you going?

Decomposition seems the main purpose of atheism...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152788
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You say that as if it is something wrong...
Are moral laws produced by secularism the same thing?
Obviously they are, so you would then be arguing against those as well...
Not clear what you are asking:

1) Are the moral laws determined by humanism the same as those determined by religion? The clear answer is no: humanists are more likely to support gay marriage, for example. Because they see fairness as central, the unfairness of the denial of marriage simply because of sexual preference is wrong.

2) Are moral laws produced by secularism also based on trying to control people? No, the ultimate goal is human happiness and fulfillment, not control. Religion is the side obsessed with control.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152789
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
What atheism is actually at war with, is this fundamental truth:
"In the beginning, God..."
War is a harsh word. But yes, we deny that this is a 'fundamental truth'.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152790
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
As a matter of interest, what is your purpose?
My purposes in life: to love, to learn, to teach, to help, to experience, to share.

More specifically, I have devoted a fair amount of my life to understanding mathematics and physics and teaching the same. I am married and love my wife and support her life choices just like she supports mine.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152791
Feb 10, 2013
 
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Stop being such a coward, there are no CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNT OF JESUS OUTSIDE OF THE BIBLE. Now that is a FACT. Any other accounts of Jesus were written decades after his existence. That is also a FACT. Don't be a pussy, now, show me your evidence, and not your holy book, that shows that the Jesus you spastically believe in, existed.
Paul was writing about it 20 years later and churches had already been formed. Tacitus made reference to the events.

Something happened.

You have very few eyewitness accounts to any event in the distant past, including some of your more cherished ones. Almost all were records and interpretation of events written by some scholar. You won't have contemporaneous accounts until the advent of newspapers and such mass media.

You will find controversy about the Jordanian lead codices, but those were mass media of the day. Sheets of lead turned into tracts. You carve your message in wooden blocks, and stamp out lead sheets. Printing without ink.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152792
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
You're arguing for an "absolute morality" which, according to you includes "love God".
First, I would argue that there is no such thing as an "absolute morality" as all morality is defined by humans.
Even ignoring that, any "absolute morality" would by definition have to be applicable to everybody, including Buddhist, or it could not be considered "absolute".
So, your argument for any "absolute morality" fails on at least 2 levels.
Oh but that's right ... you're just making stuff up.
I understand your argument.

But it is however absurd.

You cannot define anything unless you have a standard to define it against.

So what "standard" do you define "subjective morality" with?

Really try to think about this question, so far it seems you have not understood it.

You have to appeal to an ultimate standard, to prove any standard.

With morality, what is your ultimate standard?

Societies opinion?

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152793
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Showing you don't know what a virtual particle actually is. Or that their effects have been detected.
A virtual particle is a math construct to make numbers crunch, which means the numbers and formulas in the beginning are in error.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152794
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Pronoun problems - define what you mean "they"?
The laws of logic (usually quoted as 3 - sometimes 4), do a quick google search, standard philosophical terminology.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152795
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
I know you have them.
You know you have them.
You are missing the point.
As an atheist you cannot account for it.
Because you have to deny the self evident truth that you were intelligently created with a spiritual purpose, whilst claiming the right to that purpose.
As a matter of interest, what is your purpose?
Actually, it is you who is missing the point - and tragically so.

You keep repeating (ad nauseum, I might add) that people who don't believe in a god can't account for morality or reason or purpose or destiny and on and on and on.

You keep repeating this as if it were a fact, when clearly it is not.

However, you have to keep repeating it because, in your mind, it is inconceivable that people can have or be these things without the benefit of believing in your god.

You chose to believe something and once you did that, you closed your mind to all other possibilities.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152796
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
It is shown, it is tested, by the very post you have here.
You argue absolutes, which can only be accounted for by an intelligent First Cause.
You have been built a certain way and the makers signature is written into every aspect of your life.
But due to your desire to sin, you have to deny your maker, whilst appealing to his workmanship as the basis for your denial.
Which is of course absurd, and fully explained in the scripture.
LOL...so the proof of your god's existence is that I don't believe in your god?

Oh well, I guess that means Leprechauns and unicorns are real too....

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152797
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You say that as if it is something wrong...
Are moral laws produced by secularism the same thing?
Obviously they are, so you would then be arguing against those as well...
So you admit that "sin" is a man made concept and not something handed down by an imaginary god.

Bravo! You're making progress!

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152798
Feb 10, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
A virtual particle is a math construct to make numbers crunch, which means the numbers and formulas in the beginning are in error.
No it is a measurable physical disturbance that has been detected.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152799
Feb 10, 2013
 
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand your argument.
But it is however absurd.
You cannot define anything unless you have a standard to define it against.
So what "standard" do you define "subjective morality" with?
Really try to think about this question, so far it seems you have not understood it.
You have to appeal to an ultimate standard, to prove any standard.
With morality, what is your ultimate standard?
Societies opinion?
The happiness and fulfillment of people with fairness.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#152801
Feb 10, 2013
 
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it is you who is missing the point - and tragically so.
You keep repeating (ad nauseum, I might add) that people who don't believe in a god can't account for morality or reason or purpose or destiny and on and on and on.
You keep repeating this as if it were a fact, when clearly it is not.
However, you have to keep repeating it because, in your mind, it is inconceivable that people can have or be these things without the benefit of believing in your god.
You chose to believe something and once you did that, you closed your mind to all other possibilities.
If you weren't exposed to the concepts via the existing religion it is unlikely you would develop such on your own.

You have to have something to think about before you can think about it.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 146,801 - 146,820 of223,214
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••