Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story
Imhotep

Orlando, FL

#171897 Jul 13, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
But this doesn't indicate that Tacitus didn't write it. This is clearly a case of a later scribe correcting what was believed to be a misspelling. In ancient Rome, Christians were commonly called Chrestians because they (and Tacitus) had previously thought that Chrestus was a name rather than a title. They had mistranslated "Christ" which is the Hebrew word for "Messiah". That a later scribe corrected the misspelling doesn't mean that Tacitus didn't write it. In fact, none of the original Annals of Rome exist anymore. We have copies. Spelling corrections were common in those days. It doesn't change the meaning at all. Teachers correct spelling errors every day. Does that mean the student didn't write the paper?
Now, as to your charge that I'm erecting straw men, go ahead and prove me wrong by answering my questions honestly.
1) Do you accept the Tacitus history of Augustus Caesar as accurate?
2) Do you accept the Josephus historical account of Herod Agrippa?
3) Do you accept Pliny the Younger's description of the Mount Vesuvius volcanic eruption as accurate?
I will accept answers of yes or no to these questions. They're simple. Either you accept them or you don't.
But-
If you do accept all of them as historically accurate, then it shows you have bias against only those passages that speak of Jesus or make any kind of reference to him as a historical person.
If you don't accept them as historically accurate, then we might as well just wipe out all we know of ancient Hebrew and Roman history since these are probably our very best historians from that era in human history.
Either way, you've cornered yourself. Now go ahead and wiggle out of this conundrum.
It's time for you to wiggle little sheep!

please explain this... Take your time...

Crack open a Gideons and check this out.

Today’s scholars can only use the known, that is historical reigning Roman Emperors as a reference in determining dates.

So, since your Bible clearly and unambiguously claims that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the King, then he, Jesus, had to have been born no later than 4 B.C.

Irony meter goes boom!

Jesus could only have been born a minimum of four years before the birth of Jesus?

After you stop laughing though, consider the import of this paradox.
Imhotep

Orlando, FL

#171898 Jul 13, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Well said and great post! History shows us how little of the bible was original.
<quoted text>
Thank you ;)
I find theist posters particularly uneducated and uninformed.

They remain deliberately ignorant in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Anyone that takes to time to research these various religions will find the same things I do.

One could make the argument that the desert religions all based on RA, the Egyptian God.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#171899 Jul 13, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>what you call a myth! Billions call the truth! only a hand full of lost dumb atheist call it a myth.. you are just one of the dumb
And people once said the world was flat, your point is?

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#171900 Jul 13, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>myths are science books
What myths in what science books?

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#171901 Jul 13, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
And people once said the world was flat, your point is?
thats science for you..

“1000 Sting of Scorpion to you”

Since: Feb 07

Jurassic, Indiana

#171902 Jul 13, 2013
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
ouch i think i've stepped on a Osama bin-Saban have to clean my shoe
Mikko, Mikko, Mikko… you should be thanking Osama for saving your pathetic life this morning! Yep ... Osama, while driving his Land Rover, ran over a shi+ eatin' dog!
<:)

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#171903 Jul 13, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
What myths in what science books?
OMG dude!!! you have a computer use it.. I could copy & paste for yrs on science screw-ups and you would say prove it!

some peeps are just plain ol dumb!

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#171904 Jul 13, 2013
Osama bin-Saban wrote:
<quoted text>Mikko, Mikko, Mikko… you should be thanking Osama for saving your pathetic life this morning! Yep ... Osama, while driving his Land Rover, ran over a shi+ eatin' dog!
<:)
1000 good mornings to ya Osama bin Sabin..

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#171905 Jul 13, 2013
YO Osama bin Saban you being from up in Indiana, are you a Notre Dame fan? Or maybe a big ten sissy I-I-I mean fan...

Clownie a SEC guy!
ROLL TIDE ROLL

“1000 Sting of Scorpion to you”

Since: Feb 07

Jurassic, Indiana

#171907 Jul 13, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>1000 good mornings to ya Osama bin Sabin..
And 1000 God given sunrises to you, Clown El Sheik! Allah blesses Osama and Clown with another day of magnificent health, and intellectual knowledge, and wisdom. So it was said ... so it was done!
<:)

“1000 Sting of Scorpion to you”

Since: Feb 07

Jurassic, Indiana

#171908 Jul 13, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
YO Osama bin Saban you being from up in Indiana, are you a Notre Dame fan? Or maybe a big ten sissy I-I-I mean fan...
Clownie a SEC guy!
ROLL TIDE ROLL
> Osama and his harem of 1000 women on vacation in Jurassic, Indiana! Osama and his harem wanted to see all the dinosaurs and dusty stone tablets of Notre Dame lore! 1000 sting of scorpion to you for suggesting that Osama be infidel big-10 sissy fan! Osama is big-time SEC fan ... where real men like Osama play championship tackle football. Only champions not chumps need talk to the Great Osama ... ya hear!?
<:)

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#171909 Jul 13, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>OMG dude!!! you have a computer use it.. I could copy & paste for yrs on science screw-ups and you would say prove it!
some peeps are just plain ol dumb!
Science is not perfect. But it has mechanisms to correct mistakes. over sufficient time, mistakes will be found and corrected. In particular, anything that is central to a subject and has lasted over a couple of decades is going to be correct, at least in broad outline. Anything that has lasted for 50 years is going to be correct in most details.

The theory of evolution has been central to biology for the last 150+ years. While some things have changed over that time (including the introduction of genetics), the basic ideas have been repeatedly verified in many different ways.

Science tends to 'screw up' at the boundaries of knowledge, not in those areas that have been well-tested over the course of decades. Even when scientific revolutions happen, the main observed effects still remain. The changes tend to happen at the edges of established knowledge, not the center.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#171910 Jul 13, 2013
Maybe at four years old he crawled back up Mary's snatch to come out again at the proper date?
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>It's time for you to wiggle little sheep!

please explain this... Take your time...

Crack open a Gideons and check this out.

TodayÂ’s scholars can only use the known, that is historical reigning Roman Emperors as a reference in determining dates.

So, since your Bible clearly and unambiguously claims that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the King, then he, Jesus, had to have been born no later than 4 B.C.

Irony meter goes boom!

Jesus could only have been born a minimum of four years before the birth of Jesus?

After you stop laughing though, consider the import of this paradox.

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#171911 Jul 13, 2013
Osama bin-Saban wrote:
<quoted text>> Osama and his harem of 1000 women on vacation in Jurassic, Indiana! Osama and his harem wanted to see all the dinosaurs and dusty stone tablets of Notre Dame lore! 1000 sting of scorpion to you for suggesting that Osama be infidel big-10 sissy fan! Osama is big-time SEC fan ... where real men like Osama play championship tackle football. Only champions not chumps need talk to the Great Osama ... ya hear!?
<:)
if you have 1000 SEC women with you in Jurassiic Indiana.. Im there!!!! HAVE GPS WILL TRAVEL!

SEC FOOTBALL & WOMEN! WE CAN HANG-OUT OSAMA THE GREAT ONE! DON'T TELL ME YALL WILL BE TAIL-GATING ALSO!! THE ATHEIST DON'T BELIEVE IN TAILGATING THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN TO ONE! OR SEEN ONE! SAD

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#171912 Jul 13, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Science is not perfect. But it has mechanisms to correct mistakes. over sufficient time, mistakes will be found and corrected. In particular, anything that is central to a subject and has lasted over a couple of decades is going to be correct, at least in broad outline. Anything that has lasted for 50 years is going to be correct in most details.
The theory of evolution has been central to biology for the last 150+ years. While some things have changed over that time (including the introduction of genetics), the basic ideas have been repeatedly verified in many different ways.
Science tends to 'screw up' at the boundaries of knowledge, not in those areas that have been well-tested over the course of decades. Even when scientific revolutions happen, the main observed effects still remain. The changes tend to happen at the edges of established knowledge, not the center.
Mistakes taken as truths at the time can kill people. Of course you can just chalk them up as statistics, unless you are one of them.

Those mistakes, particularly in physics, also branch off and get manifested in other disciplines of science. A ripple effect that can take considerably longer than 20 or 50 years to correct.

There is much to be said for getting it right the first time, and not professing those ultimately mistakes as "truths" in the search for knowledge, which is almost always the case. Your approach there is just science apologetics. Your belief system justifies those mistakes and lives lost and other harmful things to mankind in your "search for knowledge". The means justifies the end. You are totally ignoring the personal aspects of the living experience and the rights of individuals to experience them. Your god is this nebulous desire to conquer the universe which your own science says will be impossible.

You speak of 20 and 50 year periods to prove something by lasting. Religions and theistic, deistic, and beliefs in the supernatural have lasted for thousands of years. They have been put to the test repeatedly and severely. Why are you now saying they are all wrong out of hand?

You are caught in a cult.

“1000 Sting of Scorpion to you”

Since: Feb 07

Jurassic, Indiana

#171913 Jul 13, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Maybe at four years old he crawled back up Mary's snatch to come out again at the proper date?
<quoted text>
Osama sees you're still pissed at your old man for letting the best part of you drip down his leg. Yeah, I guess that would piss you off!
>:/

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#171914 Jul 13, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Science is not perfect. But it has mechanisms to correct mistakes. over sufficient time, mistakes will be found and corrected. In particular, anything that is central to a subject and has lasted over a couple of decades is going to be correct, at least in broad outline. Anything that has lasted for 50 years is going to be correct in most details.
"Science is not perfect. But it has mechanisms to correct mistakes. "

Wikipedia:
If anyone finds a case where all or part of a scientific theory is false, then that theory is either changed or thrown out.

A scientific theory in one branch of science must hold true in all of the other branches of science.

From Nova:

"For decades, every attempt to describe the force of gravity in the same language as the other forces—the language of quantum mechanics—has met with disaster

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: You try to put those two pieces of mathematics together, they do not coexist peacefully.
The laws of nature are supposed to apply everywhere. So if Einstein's laws are supposed to apply everywhere, and the laws of quantum mechanics are supposed to apply everywhere, well you can't have two separate everywheres.

BRIAN GREENE: In the years since, physics split into two separate camps: one that uses general relativity to study big and heavy objects, things like stars, galaxies and the universe as a whole...

...and another that uses quantum mechanics to study the tiniest of objects, like atoms and particles. This has been kind of like having two families that just cannot get along and never talk to each other...
There just seemed to be no way to combine quantum mechanics...

and general relativity in a single theory that could describe the universe on all scales.

So here's the question: if you're trying to figure out what happens in the depths of a black hole, where an entire star is crushed to a tiny speck, do you use general relativity because the star is incredibly heavy or quantum mechanics because it's incredibly tiny?

Well, that's the problem. Since the center of a black hole is both tiny and heavy, you can't avoid using both theories at the same time. And when we try to put the two theories together in the realm of black holes, they conflict. It breaks down. They give nonsensical predictions. And the universe is not nonsensical; it's got to make sense.

BRIAN GREENE: It's a little known secret but for more than half a century a dark cloud has been looming over modern science. Here's the problem: our understanding of the universe is based on two separate theories. One is Einstein's general theory of relativity—that's a way of understanding the biggest things in the universe, things like stars and galaxies. But the littlest things in the universe, atoms and subatomic particles, play by an entirely different set of rules called, "quantum Mechanics"

These two sets of rules are each incredibly accurate in their own domain but whenever we try to combine them, to solve some of the deepest mysteries in the universe, disaster strikes.

Take the beginning of the universe, the "big bang." At that instant a tiny nugget erupted violently. Over the next 14 billion years the universe expanded and cooled into the stars, galaxies and planets we see today. But if we run the cosmic film in reverse, everything that's now rushing apart comes back together, so the universe gets smaller, hotter and denser as we head back to the beginning of time.

As we reach the big bang, when the universe was both enormously heavy and incredibly tiny, our projector jams. Our two laws of physics, when combined, break down.

"Science is not perfect. But it has mechanisms to correct mistakes"

They just refuse to follow their own rules.

“1000 Sting of Scorpion to you”

Since: Feb 07

Jurassic, Indiana

#171915 Jul 13, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>if you have 1000 SEC women with you in Jurassiic Indiana.. Im there!!!! HAVE GPS WILL TRAVEL!
SEC FOOTBALL & WOMEN! WE CAN HANG-OUT OSAMA THE GREAT ONE! DON'T TELL ME YALL WILL BE TAIL-GATING ALSO!! THE ATHEIST DON'T BELIEVE IN TAILGATING THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN TO ONE! OR SEEN ONE! SAD
Duh!!! Well, yeah... Osama always has many SEC women around him. Osama sing Psalm 127:3-5 Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one's youth. Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate. Osama's enemies have absolutely no chance of defeating him! None!!! So it is said ... so it will be done!
>:)

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#171916 Jul 13, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Maybe at four years old he crawled back up Mary's snatch to come out again at the proper date?
<quoted text>
The four year difference is due to a mistake in the 6th century made by the monk Dionysus Exiguus, whom was using Roman records to date the birth year of Jesus. The Roman dating system was based upon the founding of Rome and wasn't calculated using the zeros that were used later in Europe.

Modern archeology confirmed the true date of Jesus' birth about 200 years ago because of discoveries relating to the reign of Herod the Great. This dating error has no effect on the orthodox doctrines of the Christian church, and doesn't compromise scriptural integrity in any way.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#171917 Jul 13, 2013
Certainly the Egyptian gods predated Yahweh by centuries. They had a savior messiah son of god who you had to believe in to get to heaven thousands of years before the Jesus myth. The book of the dead sounds exactly like the bible in various parts and it predates the oldest shred in the Torah by centuries.
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you ;)
I find theist posters particularly uneducated and uninformed.

They remain deliberately ignorant in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Anyone that takes to time to research these various religions will find the same things I do.

One could make the argument that the desert religions all based on RA, the Egyptian God.

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
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 43 min Eman 21,992
The Ultimate Evidence of God 1 hr sriKim 120
Stump a theist with 2 questions 2 hr Patrick 12
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom 2 hr Jaimie 68
How much faith it takes to believe in Evolution. 3 hr Patrick 178
An atheist returns to Christ (Jan '09) 8 hr Patrick 4,085
Atheism vs. Theism: Knowns and Unknowns 9 hr Patrick 38
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••