Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258485 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: Jun 13

Milwaukee, WI

#170819 Jul 4, 2013
Divine Alien wrote:
When we leave this world, we are going back to God himself.
and you know this for a fact? have you witnessed this yourself?
mitch syfer

Philippines

#170820 Jul 4, 2013
hello im mitch!:) wanna add me up on my skype?: mitch.getme21.. bored now. wanna have some fun?..:*
I'm waiting!:*

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#170821 Jul 4, 2013
I said there is no proof he ever existed.

Opinion from forced indoctrination doesn't show historical proof.

Show historical proof Jesus even existed. If you fail then Jesus is no more historical than Robin Hood, Puff the magic dragon or Hercules....

Oops actually we have a wealth of historical evidence that Hercules existed, sadly none that Jesus existed.
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>you say Jesus didn't exist! its your word agaist billions! lets see do I believe the bible and billions of other christians ??? or some atheist chump (snicker) on topix... Im gonna believe the bible.. not the chump

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#170822 Jul 4, 2013
So you are saying Dave Nelson is gay!

Hahahaha!
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>Guy's that say thingies! are gay.. just sayin

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#170823 Jul 4, 2013
Apologetic babbling, so pathetic.

So a god who answers prayers or actually does something to help those in desperate need is not worthy of worship?
Favorite Adversary wrote:
<quoted text>Okay we'll address this point first. This is an assumption that because God can control what will happen, that He will control what will happen according to our standards. Such a God would not be worthy of worship if He catered to our every whim.

blacklagoon wrote, "Now we can stop right here if you claim that God is incapable on seeing and controlling the future. If we go on the fact that he can, then an explanation needs to be offered for Eve's eating the forbidden fruit."

Agreed.

blacklagoon wrote, "Eve has no concept of right and wrong, only that she was told NOT to eat from the tree of knowledge."

Here, I disagree. She knew the difference between right and wrong. Telling somebody what they can and cannot do, is telling them the difference between right and wrong. What Eve didn't have prior to eating the fruit was guilt. There was no need for guilt when in compliance with God's directives.

blacklagoon wrote, "Now the question is, did God KNOW that she would violate his request? Could he in fact look into the future and see her eating the forbidden fruit? If so, what is the rationale for not only punishing Adam and Eve, but ALL of mankind?"

God knew. But God had to allow free will. God decides when to control or influence others and when not to. Now if Adam and Eve had obeyed God, they would enjoy immortality with their creator. By choosing to go against God's directive, they were found unworthy of immortality, and this rebellious trait was passed from generation to generation. Now notice that God didn't kill them outright. He could have, but didn't. But He did remove their immortality when He banished them from His presence and the Garden of Eden.

If God can remove immortality, then He can restore it as well. This is where He makes a promise to Adam and Eve that He will restore eternal life to their descendants.

blacklagoon wrote, "Since you enjoy analogous situations. I know my 5 year old loves cookies. I tell her NOT to eat a cookie, I then leave a cookie in her room, on the bed, knowing full well that as a 5 year old with no one around, she will eat the cookie. I hid around the corner and wait for her to eat the cookie, then spring into her room and punish her for eating the cookie. Is this something you could ever do? Do you see anything wrong with a parent doing such a thing? "

I understand what you're saying. But you're viewing this as cosmic entrapment. Yes we love our kids and yes we want them to behave morally without toying with them. We allow them a certain amount of freedom. We allow them to make choices within boundaries of our limitations. Why do we stop kids from rushing into the street? Because we love them and don't want them hurt or killed of course. And there is the difference. We have no power over death. God does. And if that's true, then it's worth it to trust His judgement.

Now you may not agree with my answers, but that's okay. I have told you what I believe as I understand it. I have enjoyed this discourse with you, and I look forward to more if you're willing. Good night my friend.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#170824 Jul 4, 2013
Damn, clowny just said you were a gay man Dave.
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>Damn, loony, you would be missing your chance if you don't compose something. Make it your requiem played at your funeral. Give it a neat name, like "How I Told God to Fu*k Off, I Didn't Need Or Want Him". You would be an inspiration to millions of atheists. They would buy millions of copies. You could capture the youth market and use that song to point them the right way, yours.

You could be a real hero to the cause. Come on, that will be your last chance to jab a finger into the eye of a mythical evil entity, right?

You can't pass that up. You are the best there is.

Since: Jun 13

Milwaukee, WI

#170825 Jul 4, 2013
atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes it is. We can argue about this for years. Atheism is a faith and it is a religion of failure. I will be watching you in desperation.
look religitard atheism is not FAITH you explane to me why it is faith faith is nothing more then wishiful thinking atheist do not practice wishing thinking as far as i know
Thinking

Lymington, UK

#170826 Jul 4, 2013
Non believing is a faith in much the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby.
atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes it is. We can argue about this for years. Atheism is a faith and it is a religion of failure. I will be watching you in desperation.
Imhotep

United States

#170827 Jul 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I said there is no proof he ever existed.
Opinion from forced indoctrination doesn't show historical proof.
Show historical proof Jesus even existed. If you fail then Jesus is no more historical than Robin Hood, Puff the magic dragon or Hercules....
Oops actually we have a wealth of historical evidence that Hercules existed, sadly none that Jesus existed.
<quoted text>
http://jesusneverexisted.com/

Do you really think it all began with a sanctimonious Jewish wonder-worker, strolling about 1st century Palestine?

Jesus – The Imaginary Friend

Christianity was the ultimate product of religious syncretism in the ancient world. Its emergence owed nothing to a holy carpenter. There were many Jesuses but the fable was a cultural construct.

The nativity yarn is a concatenation of nonsense. The genealogies of Jesus, both Matthew's version and Luke's, are pious fiction. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century AD – the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs.

With multiple authors behind the original gospel story it is no surprise that the figure of "Jesus" is a mess of contradictions. Yet the story is so thinly drawn that being a "good Christian" might mean almost anything.

The 12 disciples are as fictitious as their master, invented to legitimise the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was not a virgin, that idea was borrowed from pagan goddesses. The pagan world knew all about virgins getting pregnant by randy gods: The Mythical "Virgin Mother".

Scholars have known all this for more than 200 years but priestcraft is a highly profitable business and finances an industry of deceit to keep the show on the road.

"Jesus better documented than any other ancient figure"? Don't believe a word of it. Unlike the mythical Jesus, a real historical figure like Julius Caesar has a mass of mutually supporting evidence.

The case for a mythical Jesus – Nailing Jesus. Book review: Ehrman - Did Jesus Exist? Popular scholar recoils from the abyss. A rescue mission for the "Jesus of history" – The New Apologists.
Favorite Adversary

Brooklyn, NY

#170828 Jul 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Apologetic babbling, so pathetic.
So a god who answers prayers or actually does something to help those in desperate need is not worthy of worship?
<quoted text>
A God worthy of praise and worship has discretion to answer prayers based upon what is best for us, and in proportion to our faith that those prayers will be answered. This isn't apologetic babbling, but it is my understanding of the Christian theology.

Apologetics is a systematic defense of what we believe. It doesn't tell us what to think. It encourages us to ask questions critically, but not over critically.
Favorite Adversary

Brooklyn, NY

#170829 Jul 4, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I said there is no proof he ever existed.
Opinion from forced indoctrination doesn't show historical proof.
Show historical proof Jesus even existed. If you fail then Jesus is no more historical than Robin Hood, Puff the magic dragon or Hercules....
Oops actually we have a wealth of historical evidence that Hercules existed, sadly none that Jesus existed.
<quoted text>
I'm glad you brought this up. Let's come to a clear understanding of what constitutes "proof." What kind of "proof" are you looking for, or what would you consider as convincing proof?

Before you answer that, consider some important points about the nature of evidence in determining history.

1) History is not and cannot be determined with the same critical burden of proof as in a criminal trial, which is "beyond reasonable doubt." History can be, and is determined by a lesser standard of cumulative evidence, much of which is circumstantial.

2) Circumstantial evidence is just as credible as direct evidence when taken as a whole, and when it is reasonable.

3) The historian does not have to be an eyewitness to what is written of. The historian looks for accounts of eyewitnesses and assesses their trustworthiness in a variety of methods.

4) If the historian does not have direct eyewitness accounts, then the historian must look for sources who knew the eyewitnesses and then look for more evidence that corroborates the information. Hearsay is not permissible in criminal court cases, but it is completely accepted in historical research so long as it's reasonably close to the original eyewitnesses themselves.

So now that we have discussed this, my question remains:

What kind of proof are you looking for?

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#170830 Jul 4, 2013
ignorance is bliss86 wrote:
<quoted text>
once again herre we have a creationist for all intensive purposes asserting that his nonsense is on par with with our sense and logic
LOL!

One more Topix atheist "I'm not really an intellectual, but I play one on Topix, can't you see by my avatar" appears on the scene.

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#170831 Jul 4, 2013
Bro. Clownie is off to do battle in a world where sissy atheist are called girly men... Only real men can post!!!! Blood sweat & tears and no queers

Bro. Clownie

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#170832 Jul 4, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are displaying your iggorance on an international forum.
IRONY!
Imhotep

United States

#170833 Jul 4, 2013
Favorite Adversary wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm glad you brought this up. Let's come to a clear understanding of what constitutes "proof." What kind of "proof" are you looking for, or what would you consider as convincing proof?
Before you answer that, consider some important points about the nature of evidence in determining history.
1) History is not and cannot be determined with the same critical burden of proof as in a criminal trial, which is "beyond reasonable doubt." History can be, and is determined by a lesser standard of cumulative evidence, much of which is circumstantial.
2) Circumstantial evidence is just as credible as direct evidence when taken as a whole, and when it is reasonable.
3) The historian does not have to be an eyewitness to what is written of. The historian looks for accounts of eyewitnesses and assesses their trustworthiness in a variety of methods.
4) If the historian does not have direct eyewitness accounts, then the historian must look for sources who knew the eyewitnesses and then look for more evidence that corroborates the information. Hearsay is not permissible in criminal court cases, but it is completely accepted in historical research so long as it's reasonably close to the original eyewitnesses themselves.
So now that we have discussed this, my question remains:
What kind of proof are you looking for?
Easy question - not so easy answer. ;)

That any God, conceived by humanity, at any time in recorded history, in fact - actually existed.

We have a Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal skeletons, fossils, dinosaurs. I believe this is tangible evidence Of their existence in the distant past.

"A thing is not proved just because no one has ever questioned it.

What has never been gone into impartially has never been properly gone into.

Hence scepticism is the first step toward truth.

It must be applied generally, because it is the touchstone." ~Denis Diderot
French author, encyclopedist, & philosopher (1713 - 1784)

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#170834 Jul 4, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
IRONY!
So sayeth the indoctrinated one.

Hey, Poly, how was space made? If the universe was a solid thingy, where did it get the space when it expanded?
Favorite Adversary

Brooklyn, NY

#170835 Jul 4, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Easy question - not so easy answer. ;)
That any God, conceived by humanity, at any time in recorded history, in fact - actually existed.
We have a Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal skeletons, fossils, dinosaurs. I believe this is tangible evidence Of their existence in the distant past.
"A thing is not proved just because no one has ever questioned it.
What has never been gone into impartially has never been properly gone into.
Hence scepticism is the first step toward truth.
It must be applied generally, because it is the touchstone." ~Denis Diderot
French author, encyclopedist, & philosopher (1713 - 1784)
A healthy does of skepticism is a good thing for sure. But if there's such a thing as healthy skepticism, then it logically follows that there must also be an unhealthy skepticism. While we must look for the truth of any assertion, we must not be so overly critical that we miss the forest for the trees.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#170836 Jul 4, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Poor Lewis. His gearbox broke in front of us in Singapore.
Lewis was on pole there too.
<quoted text>
Not exactly the most lucky driver. I was rooting for him too…

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#170837 Jul 4, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!
One more Topix atheist "I'm not really an intellectual, but I play one on Topix, can't you see by my avatar" appears on the scene.
Worthless creationist loon with no proof of god, trying to criticize facts he doesn't even understand.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#170838 Jul 4, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
Bro. Clownie is off to do battle in a world where sissy atheist are called girly men... Only real men can post!!!! Blood sweat & tears and no queers
Bro. Clownie
Your opinions will matter after you've brave enough to prove the god you're lying to us about.

Cue insults, threats of hell, sock puppets & other dishonest methods of arguing back - these are after all the theists only comeback against reason, logic & hard facts.

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 Atheist inmate wins right to practice his faith... (Aug '15) 8 min u196533dm 174
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Regolith Based Li... 80,087
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 14 hr Eagle 12 - 32,607
what science will NEVER be able to prove 21 hr Eagle 12 - 10
How To Get To Heaven When You Die (Jan '17) 21 hr Eagle 12 - 106
News People's forum - Get off the fence of religious... (May '10) 21 hr Eagle 12 - 69
News Atheist billboards to mock Romney, Obama faith (Aug '12) Sep 15 superwilly 47
More from around the web