Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 20 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.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152878 Feb 10, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Your mistake, you never should have tried to make your point using slavery. Your holy book and you God completely endorse slavery. Slave owners of the South believed, and had no problem saying so, that owning slaves was their "God Given Right." And as devout Christian, as most all slave owners were, they were absolutely right. God see's nothing wrong with one human owning another, so why should I have a problem. Slavery was not universal.
Most societies can agree on what is harmful for its citizens and the moral laws reflect that. Left to their own devises without the interference from religion, a society will define what is harmful tom it;s citizens and pass laws. Look to Islam to see how religion poisons this process. Islamic rule see's nothing at all wrong with senseless murder, and torture. All under then guise of their God ALLAH.
Christians had their day in the sun during the inquisition, another fine example of a moral code set by religion. The Inca's cut out the hearts from thousands of the living to appease their Sun God.
For your information, the GOLDEN RULES works perfectly fine for a society that is looking for a solid moral code. NO demon God needed or wanted.
You are still not dealing with the point.

Please take the time to read it and think about it, as it is clear you are not doing so at the moment.

If morality is what the "herd" decides, then nothing is absolutely wrong or absolutely right.

And you would have followed the herd all through history.

So you would have supported the inquisition.

You would have supported slavery.

You would have supported every crime that every society ever made, because you are morally bound to do so.

Your morality can never rise any higher or challenge the herd.

Therefore, you can never argue that a different herd acted immorally...

You would have been morally bound to accept the earth was flat during the dark ages.

And would have probably been standing outside Gallileos house with a pitchfork and torch demanding his execution...

Time to start thinking and leave the herd, the herd never gets it right...

And the current herd religion is secular atheism...

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#152879 Feb 10, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
WW2 inspired it it wasn't Christians alone in it's design.
It is universal Dave , meaning greater than religion, or country.
Without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion.
WWII happened a long time after the insertion of the moral codes injected into every corner of the world by Western imperialism and missionaries. Which, it so happens are derived from Christianity.

You are going to emit a blast of flatulence about that imperialism and spread of religion, but be advised that there were several conquistadors punished for abuse of the conquered because of the Church's influence, and the murdering of each other by the conquered tended to come to an end, as did human and animal sacrifice. You had greed and economics tempered by religious values that started a larger choir to sing from the same sheet of music.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152880 Feb 10, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh it's not a religious nonreligious determination, it is a logical determination. That's where your logic fails.
If you accepted what you wrote above, then no creator for first cause is required.
You need to go back and restate your premise.

Insisting on an unsound premise being accepted, does not make your argument sound...

The basic observation of causality:

Every effect has a cause.

The strawman you have setup, is not one I would be willing to argue for and not something you can support either.
Thinking

Yeovil, UK

#152881 Feb 10, 2013
Bollocks.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You are still not dealing with the point.
Please take the time to read it and think about it, as it is clear you are not doing so at the moment.
If morality is what the "herd" decides, then nothing is absolutely wrong or absolutely right.
And you would have followed the herd all through history.
So you would have supported the inquisition.
You would have supported slavery.
You would have supported every crime that every society ever made, because you are morally bound to do so.
Your morality can never rise any higher or challenge the herd.
Therefore, you can never argue that a different herd acted immorally...
You would have been morally bound to accept the earth was flat during the dark ages.
And would have probably been standing outside Gallileos house with a pitchfork and torch demanding his execution...
Time to start thinking and leave the herd, the herd never gets it right...
And the current herd religion is secular atheism...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152882 Feb 10, 2013
So all the atheists here that were born in a muslim country would be morally bound to be muslims...

...If they adhered to herd morality as they claim they do...

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#152883 Feb 10, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Of course you are terribly wrong, my claims are NOT arbitrary, and are completely true. If you say there are plenty of studies out there, feel free to post them. I'll repeat what I said before, and this is ABSOLUTE FACT....There are NO contemporary accounts of Jesus outside of the bible. Stories passed down through the centuries and anecdotal accounts do NOT count as evidence. There is actually more evidence for the Mormon faith than for your beliefs. There is much supportive evidence for Joe Smith, the Mormon equivalent to Jesus, than you have for Jesus.
The bible becomes completely invalid because of the immorality and unwarranted cruelty it contains. The list of evil is long.
Slavery...Genocide....the murder of babies and the destruction of unborn fetuses by your God.....rape...laws that require a young rape victim to marry her rapist....blood sacrifice....turning father against son.....the threat of eternal torture...... Nothing should be so obvious that this book was written by frightened old men that the horrific treatment of women. Talking snakes, a global flood, grown the f--k up will ya.
Without the Bible and the morality derived from it, you wouldn't be able to make those judgments.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#152884 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You are still not dealing with the point.
Please take the time to read it and think about it, as it is clear you are not doing so at the moment.
If morality is what the "herd" decides, then nothing is absolutely wrong or absolutely right.
And you would have followed the herd all through history.
So you would have supported the inquisition.
You would have supported slavery.
You would have supported every crime that every society ever made, because you are morally bound to do so.
Your morality can never rise any higher or challenge the herd.
Therefore, you can never argue that a different herd acted immorally...
You would have been morally bound to accept the earth was flat during the dark ages.
And would have probably been standing outside Gallileos house with a pitchfork and torch demanding his execution...
Time to start thinking and leave the herd, the herd never gets it right...
And the current herd religion is secular atheism...
God creates idiots, that you do prove.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#152885 Feb 10, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
WWII happened a long time after the insertion of the moral codes injected into every corner of the world by Western imperialism and missionaries. Which, it so happens are derived from Christianity.
You are going to emit a blast of flatulence about that imperialism and spread of religion, but be advised that there were several conquistadors punished for abuse of the conquered because of the Church's influence, and the murdering of each other by the conquered tended to come to an end, as did human and animal sacrifice. You had greed and economics tempered by religious values that started a larger choir to sing from the same sheet of music.
Oh.

Jesus 3
Atheist 0

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#152886 Feb 10, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
You have not shown the existence of a first cause. You have not shown there is only one first cause. You haven't shown anything that would suggest a first cause, even if existing and unique, would have any of the common properties assigned to a deity.
And, for that matter, you haven't defined what it *means* to cause.
<quoted text>
I understand your argument, but your assumptions are wrong, so you come to an incorrect conclusion.
You notice that mtimber plays the same game as so many other theists. mtimber plays the god of the gaps game. He cannot argue that which is known in science and history, he must argue that which is not yet known.

Ask mtimber how to cure leprosy and if he does not claim Leviticus 14:49-53 to be the answer, then you know that he does not believe in his god anymore than an Atheist.

Science, on the other hand, took a different and effective approach and there are very few cases of leprosy.

When you ask people like mtimber how to cure blindness, he first answer should be, have jesus pick up some dirt and spit into it until it is a paste, then cake it over the blind persons eyes. Then tell that person to go to the river, wash his eyes and abracadabra, the man can see!

Ask mtimber what is Pi? If he answers 3, then he his a true believer! If he goes beyond 3, he is helping fill in the gaps that we no longer need a god for.

If you get he to talk about anything that has been proven, all he has to do is, deny it. You cannot force him or convince him to admit anything. It would ruin his game.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#152887 Feb 10, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
WWII happened a long time after the insertion of the moral codes injected into every corner of the world by Western imperialism and missionaries. Which, it so happens are derived from Christianity.
You are going to emit a blast of flatulence about that imperialism and spread of religion, but be advised that there were several conquistadors punished for abuse of the conquered because of the Church's influence, and the murdering of each other by the conquered tended to come to an end, as did human and animal sacrifice. You had greed and economics tempered by religious values that started a larger choir to sing from the same sheet of music.
Nope Dave religion is only responsible in the way that religion is composed of people. People were responsible, but people of different religions. What really mattered is that the largest body of people comprised of all religions and nonreligious affiliation agreed on the terms. It is not derived from Christianity, it is derived from societies of people who interact with each other.
Religion is only a part of a larger agenda when it came to this.

You fundies can't get past the idea that morality is not dictated by god, but is in fact defined by a group of people by consensus.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152888 Feb 10, 2013
Atheism argues that the herd morality is the absolute morality of the current society.

In the dark ages, it was considered by the herd (society), that atheism was heretical and punishable by death.

Therefore, atheism has to condone the persecution of atheism by its own moral standard.

The herd decided atheism was immoral, therefore atheism was immoral...

Absurdity unmatched...

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#152889 Feb 10, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh.
Jesus 3
Atheist 0
Tell jesus to come and claim his prize!

Oh, wait! He died for your sins. How sad.

Maybe his dad will come down and claim his prize for him!

Yeah, probably not. No one has seen him since he sat down with Abraham. Then for some strange reason, god couldn't be seen by men.

You tell your god that I will divert my eyes when he shows up! I'll keep my eyes closed the entire time he is here picking up his son's prize.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152890 Feb 10, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Bollocks.
<quoted text>
I think someone just threw their torch brand at the building...:-)

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152891 Feb 10, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Without the Bible and the morality derived from it, you wouldn't be able to make those judgments.
Exactly...

They deny Christian morality, then appeal to it as the basis for defining their own bastardized version of it...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152892 Feb 10, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
God creates idiots, that you do prove.
No, God created a human race with incredible capacity.

We are completely culpable for their own idiocy...

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#152893 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
Atheism argues that the herd morality is the absolute morality of the current society.
In the dark ages, it was considered by the herd (society), that atheism was heretical and punishable by death.
Therefore, atheism has to condone the persecution of atheism by its own moral standard.
The herd decided atheism was immoral, therefore atheism was immoral...
Absurdity unmatched...
You use the word, "absolute", a lot! Yet, I get the feeling that you do not understand it's meanings.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152894 Feb 10, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
You notice that mtimber plays the same game as so many other theists. mtimber plays the god of the gaps game. He cannot argue that which is known in science and history, he must argue that which is not yet known.
Ask mtimber how to cure leprosy and if he does not claim Leviticus 14:49-53 to be the answer, then you know that he does not believe in his god anymore than an Atheist.
Science, on the other hand, took a different and effective approach and there are very few cases of leprosy.
When you ask people like mtimber how to cure blindness, he first answer should be, have jesus pick up some dirt and spit into it until it is a paste, then cake it over the blind persons eyes. Then tell that person to go to the river, wash his eyes and abracadabra, the man can see!
Ask mtimber what is Pi? If he answers 3, then he his a true believer! If he goes beyond 3, he is helping fill in the gaps that we no longer need a god for.
If you get he to talk about anything that has been proven, all he has to do is, deny it. You cannot force him or convince him to admit anything. It would ruin his game.
Without God, you cannot account for the laws of logic that make science possible.

Account for their existance outside of God and you may have a point...

Those laws of logic are transcendent and universal by the way, so you might want to chew on that a little bit first before you present the:

theherddidit argument...

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#152895 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly...
They deny Christian morality, then appeal to it as the basis for defining their own bastardized version of it...
Is there a big difference between god's morality and christian morality?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#152896 Feb 10, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope Dave religion is only responsible in the way that religion is composed of people. People were responsible, but people of different religions. What really mattered is that the largest body of people comprised of all religions and nonreligious affiliation agreed on the terms. It is not derived from Christianity, it is derived from societies of people who interact with each other.
Religion is only a part of a larger agenda when it came to this.
You fundies can't get past the idea that morality is not dictated by god, but is in fact defined by a group of people by consensus.
Uh huh.

Oh, BTW, the largest body of people comprising mankind has agreed there is a deity or higher spiritual force that man is subject to. Developed and sustained over thousands of years.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#152897 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So then, if that is case, if you do the same, you should be mocked?
You obviously do not understand that every worldview is based on pre-suppositions.
That includes yours...
(arockdidit)
And those pre-suppositions are always assumed.
That being the case, all worldviews should be mocked perhaps?
Including yours?
You condemn yourself to be mocked...
In the final analysis, no ideology can be taken as implicit truth. Never accept a master plan for reality from others. Make your own.

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 Confessions of a black atheist 4 hr Mikko 475
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 11 hr Chimney1 18,851
why Atheists believe in incest,pedophilia and b... Sun Amused 25
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) Sun thetruth 6,124
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Sun thetruth 2,094
News The Consequences of Atheism Sat Koala_Gums 1,340
News Gary Gutting and Alvin Plantinga "Is Atheism Ir... Sat geezerjock 1
More from around the web