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 8,231)

Showing posts 164,601 - 164,620 of223,271
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171451
Jul 9, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
"time did not 'come from' anything. To 'come from' requires time"
So Time is impossible!
Thanks you summed it nicely. Time could not have happened outside of Gods creation.
Box!!!!
No. Once again, time is uncaused. So, it does not 'come from' anything. That does NOT mean it is impossible. Just that it is uncaused.

Why do you insist on making the same mistakes over and over again?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171452
Jul 9, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
"No, I am pointing out the different possibilities that science has uncovered. Without extra data we cannot tell which of the possibilities is reality."
Possibilities. Could be this, could be that, or maybe that there. Keep sending money, we will figure it out some time. Promise, maybe.
Christine DingaLing uses it all the time, as do others. Why haven't you corrected them?
Uses what all the time? 10^34?

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171453
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>No. Once again, time is uncaused. So, it does not 'come from' anything. That does NOT mean it is impossible. Just that it is uncaused.

Why do you insist on making the same mistakes over and over again?
"(Time) it does not 'come from' anything. "

Correct! You've cleared this up once again, thanks.

Times existence is impossible got it!

Uncaused funny!

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171455
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Givemeliberty wrote:
Yet not a word was written about him for decades? And the story of his life kept changing even centuries later?
Again it seems a man rising from the dead and walking into Jerusalem with hundreds of risen from the grave famous Jews would have gotten some attention right?
Christianity started like all mystery cults at the time. It even follows the formula down to the letter. What's even funnier is all the errors in the NT myth when it tries to refer to the Torah! Hahaha!
This shows the NT writers were poorly educated on Jewish writings and history. Humiliatingly bad in fact.
Again we have secular proof for Jesus Ben Strada the Egyptian magician who was caught and executed but not a shred for this so called Jesus of Nazareth who raised the dead! The Egyptian magic man with his slight of hand tactics garners more secular notice than your precious Jesus who receives none whatsoever. Fact.
And the gospels don't match up.
And the letters of so called Paul come before the gospels when they should come way after.
And not even Jesus' own followers didn't bother to write about him.
You'd think one of the multitudes of people he supposedly healed or raised from the dead would have chipped in for a statue or scroll or something...
<quoted text>
Ben Stada was executed in Lydda, not Jerusalem, and the Roman governor at the time was Felix, not Pilate. It's also a century after the execution of Jesus. This comparison is dismissed by most Hebrew scholars.

Now as to your assertion that nobody wrote about Jesus during his own time is nothing more than a speculative assumption. If you're going to make that assertion then you need to show some evidence or a plausible argument to support your claim.

If you want to really examine the probability of anyone writing about Jesus in His own lifetime, it might be helpful to start by looking at other figures from the first century. But when we look at them, we must consider a number of factors.

1) Jerusalem was not highly regarded by Roman authorities as a center of culture and intellectual growth. It was troubled by revolts, a strict mono-theistic culture, and was generally regarded with contempt. The only extra-biblical historical account of any contemporary of Jesus from first century Judea was Pontius Pilate, John the Baptist, and James, the brother of Jesus, and even then it was written by Josephus decades later. And that's not even the TF.

2) We don't know what happened to any written material that might have existed. We're talking about 2,000 years here. How long is a piece of papyrus supposed to last? What's the shelf life of animal skin scrolls? We have precious few writings from the first century Roman province of Judea.

3) Factor in the 66-70 AD revolt and subsequent destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans and let's ask how much of the city was burned. The temple was destroyed, and because the temple was also where written records were kept, is it any surprise to logically reason that such contemporary writings (assuming they existed) would have been lost to the flames?

So what are your thoughts on this?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171456
Jul 9, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
"(Time) it does not 'come from' anything. "
Correct! You've cleared this up once again, thanks.
Times existence is impossible got it!
Uncaused funny!
Why do you confuse 'uncaused' with 'impossible'?

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171458
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
The authorship of the gospels has always been in dispute in the modern era, but we have no evidence of a dispute from the first three centuries of Christianity. This is most likely when any dispute would have surfaced, and to date, there's no record of such a dispute.
The early church historian Eusebius records that Mark's gospel was written first, and was essentially the eye-witness account of Peter, who was a disciple of Jesus. Eusebius was the very first historian of the early Christian church and had to assemble his extensive history from early letters, gospels, and written quotations. It's interesting to note a few items for your consideration before you form your rebuttal.
Peter was executed in Rome right around 66-67 A.D. during the Neronian Persecutions. This is accepted as true by both secular and Christian scholars as historically accurate.
Therefore, if Mark really was the scribe of Peter, then it's only logical to conclude that Mark started writing before the death of Peter. The language in Mark's gospel seems to protect Peter's feelings, which in turn suggests that Mark wrote while Peter was still alive.
Mark also accompanied Paul to Rome, and we know this from Paul's letters. Therefore, Mark was likely writing to a Greco-Roman audience and would have written in Greek which the universal language of the time. I mention this, because in Mark's account of Jesus dying on the cross, Jesus says "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" and the curious thing about it is that Mark wrote it in Aramaic, which is the language that Palestinian Jews spoke then. If Mark was writing to a Greco-Roman audience, then why would he write in Aramaic, far removed from the place where Aramaic was the primary language? He wouldn't have written it to add detail to the story for literary creativity. That kind of writing hadn't developed yet. If Mark wrote his gospel in Greek, but certain phrases in Aramaic, then it's logical to say he was writing down somebody's memories. They may not have been his own memories, but that raises a question also. If not his memories, then who's memories? If he was inventing it, it would have been written in Greek or Latin but it wasn't.
So here we have good reason to accept that at least one gospel is early and is likely based on eye-witness testimony. Now this is only one small piece of evidence. I could bring a lot more to the conversation, but it would be counter-productive to overwhelm you all at once.
You should supply links to substantiating information in a post with this many assertions.
Imhotep

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171459
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Ben Stada was executed in Lydda, not Jerusalem, and the Roman governor at the time was Felix, not Pilate. It's also a century after the execution of Jesus. This comparison is dismissed by most Hebrew scholars.
Now as to your assertion that nobody wrote about Jesus during his own time is nothing more than a speculative assumption. If you're going to make that assertion then you need to show some evidence or a plausible argument to support your claim.
If you want to really examine the probability of anyone writing about Jesus in His own lifetime, it might be helpful to start by looking at other figures from the first century. But when we look at them, we must consider a number of factors.
1) Jerusalem was not highly regarded by Roman authorities as a center of culture and intellectual growth. It was troubled by revolts, a strict mono-theistic culture, and was generally regarded with contempt. The only extra-biblical historical account of any contemporary of Jesus from first century Judea was Pontius Pilate, John the Baptist, and James, the brother of Jesus, and even then it was written by Josephus decades later. And that's not even the TF.
2) We don't know what happened to any written material that might have existed. We're talking about 2,000 years here. How long is a piece of papyrus supposed to last? What's the shelf life of animal skin scrolls? We have precious few writings from the first century Roman province of Judea.
3) Factor in the 66-70 AD revolt and subsequent destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans and let's ask how much of the city was burned. The temple was destroyed, and because the temple was also where written records were kept, is it any surprise to logically reason that such contemporary writings (assuming they existed) would have been lost to the flames?
So what are your thoughts on this?
There isn't any proof that Jesus existed.

Nor is there any proof of Moses & Mohammad.

Take away those holy books... and they don't exist in history.

The Egyptians didn't record anything about Moses, and the Romans did not record anything about Jesus.

You have a problem with Cro-Magnon and. Neanderthal man. A problem with dinosaurs.
A much larger problem with fossils. All Of which existed long ago, Before the emergence of Homo sapiens.

I do not pretend to be able to prove that there is no God. I equally cannot prove that Satan is a fiction.

The Christian God may exist; so may the gods of Olympus, or of ancient Egypt, or of Babylon.

But no one of these hypotheses is more probable than any other: they lie outside the region of even probable knowledge, and therefore there is no reason to consider any of them.

The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more often likely to be foolish than sensible.

"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad."
~ALDOUS HUXLEY

;)

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171460
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
You should supply links to substantiating information in a post with this many assertions.
Google it.
Imhotep

Lakeland, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171461
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You dodged the Socrates question.
You need to get some sleep Davy!

You've been giving the devil two black eyes for too long!

Hmm... something about Socrates?
OK

"Do not do to others that which would anger you if others did it to you." -- Socrates (the Greek philosopher), circa 470-399 BCE

In ancient Greece, Socrates was reputed to hold knowledge in the highest esteem.

One day an acquaintance met the great philosopher and said, "Socrates, do you know what I just heard about your friend?"

"Hold on a minute," Socrates replied. "Before telling me anything I'd like you to pass a little test. It's called the Triple Filter Test."

"Triple filter?"

"That's right," Socrates continued. "Before you talk to me about my friend, it might be a good idea to take a moment and filter what you're going to say.

The first filter is Truth. Have you made absolutely sure that what you are about to tell me is absolutely true?

"No," the man said, "I actually just heard about it and..."

"All right," said Socrates. "So you don't really know if it's true or not. Now let's try the second filter, the filter of Goodness. Is what you are about to tell me about my friend something good?"

"No, on the contrary..."

"So," Socrates continued, "you want to tell me something bad about him, but you're not certain it's true. You may still pass the test though, because there's one filter left: the filter of Usefulness. Is what you want to tell me about my friend going to be useful to me?"

"No, not really."

"Well," concluded Socrates, "if what you want to tell me is neither true nor good nor even useful, why tell it to me at all?"

This is why Socrates was a great philosopher and held in such high esteem.

It also explains why he never found out his best friend was banging his wife.!

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171462
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you confuse 'uncaused' with 'impossible'?
Why do think that's a legit reason that time can exist from nothing.(Which of course is impossible)

Uncaused - is this the name of your Deity?

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171463
Jul 9, 2013
 
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing like having conflicting accounts and beliefs in your official documentation to prove it was all one gigantic conspiracy, eh? Adds that touch of real experts, don't you know? All without the benefit of mass communications or rapid transportation.
Gee, you know what, come to think of it? THE WHOLE ROMAN EMPIRE MAY NOT HAVE EXISTED!! It could have just been a conspiracy to believe it existed for some nefarious purpose.
You are ridiculous.
There was major league social disruption in the area for a hundred years after, and Rome had lots of other problems to deal with besides Judea. Lots of building and records burned during the revolts. Not only destruction from the war, but also competing ideologies and religions of the area.
It is beyond ridiculous that christians believe that the Romans would not have documented Jesus Christ's being. If he was around doing the things that is claimed in the bible it would have been documented, and it wasn't. Now that is obvious, and if you deny that then you are simply being stubborn and ignorant about history.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171464
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>
And atheist are
slaves to sin,
homosexuals,
thieves,
drunkards,
slanderers,
swindlers,
wicked,
Just to name a few!
I am none of these things, and I am a non-believer.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171465
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
"(Time) it does not 'come from' anything. "
Correct! You've cleared this up once again, thanks.
Times existence is impossible got it!
Uncaused funny!
Time is a dimension, so what caused height? or length or width?
What ever caused them caused time. Must have been the expansion in the Big Bang?
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171469
Jul 9, 2013
 
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, this is where we disagree.(Yes I finally registered so this is my username now) I believe there is evidence that God has restored life. Now whether you believe that evidence amounts to conclusive proof is another matter entirely. That evidence is the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
If the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John are true eyewitness reports (as I believe they are) then yes God has restored limbs when Jesus cured lepers. Leprosy is a very nasty disease that causes people to lose limbs. And if there is going to be a world-wide resurrection of the dead at Christ's second coming, then we can expect that we will be given new bodies that are superior to what we possess now.
<quoted text>
Yes people should be skeptical. But not all things are made up. In truth, Christians are called to be open minded (even if fundamentalists don't believe it). Open minded does not mean being gullible. It means considering both natural and supernatural processes. We should consider natural processes up to the point where natural processes cannot sufficiently account for a majority of the data. At that point we are to begin looking to see if there is a supernatural explanation, but without forcing it to fit our beliefs.
I think you need to revisit the definite of evidence. There ARE THREE interacting words here....EVIDENCE....FACTS....a nd INFORMATION.....FACT..."t his which is INDISPUTABLY the case".......EVIDENCE..... ."Available body of FACTS or INFORMATION indicating whether a belief is true or valid." ....INFORMATION..."FACTS provided or learned about something or someone."

You have NO evidence that Jesus rose fro the dead. You have an ancient book, who's authorship is unknown, telling a story about a resurrection. You may believe it if you like but it hardly counts as any kind of evidence. Once again your holy book is basically a male dominated bureaucracy deriving its authority from anonymously authored ancient tales and antiquated edicts.

Evidence ALWAYS amounts to conclusive proof. Thats how we determine if something is true or not. How can you for one moment think that a story from an ancient book constitutes evidence?

The gospels are not eyewitness accounts, even theologians will tell you that. Here are some quotes by biblical scholars i regards to the gospels.

"The Gospels written by MARK were NOT actually written by Mark. We know little of who the author was circa 65 CE. We don't even know his name. Mark's name has been used as a primary source over the course of thousands of years. The Gospels have been altered multiple times."

"The evidence for the existence of Jesus all comes from AFTER HIS LIFETIME." Most scholars believe not everything contained in the gospels to be historically reliable. The elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include, but are not limited to, the 2 accounts of the Nativity of Jesus, as well as the resurrection and the crucifixion."

"The evidence for the existence of Jesus ALL came from after his lifetime. Biblical scholars have created this historical Jesus in their own image. The gospel accounts are so mythical in nature that nothing, not even the existence of Christ can be determined from them."

I have more, but as you can see, even biblical scholars are uncertain of the existence of Christ let alone his resurrection.

NEVER.....EVER in recorded history has there been an instance where a missing limb has been miraculously replaced. Theists all proclaim that prayers are in fact answered, but NEVER those of an amputee.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171470
Jul 9, 2013
 
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did Time come from?
This is not a religious question.
This is not a lack of faith question.
This is a science question pertaining to your 3 myths.
Your 3 BIG Myths:
1) the Big Bang when nothing exploded
and created everything.
2) rain falling on rocks and settling in a mud puddle and spontaneous self generating life sprang forth.
3) plants evolving into plant eating animals.
And when I snap my fingers you will wake up and believe these 3 myths as if they were fact.
"SNAP"
Time was man made...you should already know that.

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171471
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
I am none of these things, and I am a non-believer.
in spiritual darkness,
under the power of Satan,
separated from Christ,
without hope,
without God in this world,
foolish,
disobedient,
deceived,

you're all these things IMO

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171472
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
Time was man made...you should already know that.
GOD made day & night!!!
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171473
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, this is where we disagree.(Yes I finally registered so this is my username now) I believe there is evidence that God has restored life. Now whether you believe that evidence amounts to conclusive proof is another matter entirely. That evidence is the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
If the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John are true eyewitness reports (as I believe they are) then yes God has restored limbs when Jesus cured lepers. Leprosy is a very nasty disease that causes people to lose limbs. And if there is going to be a world-wide resurrection of the dead at Christ's second coming, then we can expect that we will be given new bodies that are superior to what we possess now.
<quoted text>
Yes people should be skeptical. But not all things are made up. In truth, Christians are called to be open minded (even if fundamentalists don't believe it). Open minded does not mean being gullible. It means considering both natural and supernatural processes. We should consider natural processes up to the point where natural processes cannot sufficiently account for a majority of the data. At that point we are to begin looking to see if there is a supernatural explanation, but without forcing it to fit our beliefs.
Of course things are made up. Christians have made up heaven and hell. At one point the Catholic church made up a place called LIMBO. Some years later they renounced this made up place. Religion in general has made up many different accounts of the creation of the universe and our planet. Christians made up the global flood, angels, demons, Satan, the parting of the Red Sea, they make up all sorts of things.

How can you ever arrive at a "supernatural explanation?" There is only ONE realm, that of the naturalistic realm, in it is contained all we know and experience. NOTHING can be known of the supernatural realm, a non-existent realm. So no, we do not look for explanation in the supernatural, its pointless as there can be NO information gathered from that which does not exist. We should consider natural processes only, at the point were natural processes cannot sufficiently account for the data, then it simply becomes UNKNOWN. Here is the great downfall of the Theist, its called...GOD OF THE GAPS. When science cannot account for data, the Theists LEAPS quickly and fills the gap with GOD. Rather than search for the real answer, God becomes a substitute. The major problem for the Theist here, is that for thousands of years science has slowly replaced God causes, with the real answers. Thunder and lightning, disease, volcanos and earthquakes, all Gods realm, then science told us the real answers. Those who play the god of the gaps games face the fact that as science discovers more and more, God becomes an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171474
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
Another Satan-bot spamming the "Big Bang Did It" junkery.
Satan is part of YOUR belief...not mine.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#171475
Jul 9, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>GOD made day & night!!!
Day and night occur because of our orbit around the sun, and I have no idea if "god" had a hand in it, but so far science has given me more answers than "god" ever did.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 164,601 - 164,620 of223,271
|
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
•••
•••