Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258480 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.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172906 Jul 24, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Bob
QQ
You refer to banning... can I assume this only applies to people who join topix?
What, if any, is the benefit of joining?
Although I do not watch FOXNews O'Reilly from time to time does have something worthwhile.
This off-topic piece from O'Reilly is very insightful in my opinion what do you think?
http://www.billoreilly.com/video...
Grey-boxers (such as yourself) can get banned too.

The database that preserves the posts? Has information that links each post back to the computer that posted it.

It's how Topix knows to "remember" the name you used from before, when you start to post a new item.

So the ban-hammer simply deletes all the database items that have this same ID code in the ID field.

And **boom** a grey boxer's posts are sent to nifelheim.

They can also prevent that individual computer's signature, from accessing Topix too.

But that latter is easily spoofed, if you have a modicum of netskils.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172907 Jul 24, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
What, if any, is the benefit of joining?
A couple of things.

You can send and receive private messages (but that is blockable too, by individual users-- I quite imagine that the hategodbots block all incoming messages, so they can pretend they are not hate-filled).

But, to me? The most important benefit? Is nobody can misuse your name.

I've had grey-boxers attempt that with mine. They had no success, and fooled no one, of course.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#172908 Jul 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I knew the thing about urine from a healthy bladder.
I think I also knew the newspaper thing too-- I recall a story where a newborn, born in a cab, was "swaddled" in fresh-from-the-presses newspaper, as nothing else was available (that was sanitary).
But wouldn't the taste of the ink affect the food?
Maybe that was a an added benefit?
<laughing too>
I never noticed.

I miss it anyway.

Since: Sep 08

Lamar, CO

#172909 Jul 24, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Newspaper, as issued, is actually sterile. Combination of heat and the bleaching process, I think.
As an aside, urine (as issued from an undiseased bladder) is also sterile. Capstick relates an incident where a native assistant saved another's eyesight by peeing in his eyes, after he took a hit from a spitting cobra.
Coupla useful first-aid tips.
Laffin.
The issue with newspapers as food wrapping was the lead and chemicals in the ink. Remember when newspapers could bleed when they got wet?
Thinking

Royston, UK

#172910 Jul 24, 2013
I've no control over which town BT reports me as posting from... but staggeringly enough, that is actually my local town. Just 24 minutes to Marylebone, these days.

"Ooh me Chalfonts!" - the best euphemism for haemorrhoids. Ever.
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I go back a long way. And I'm a traditionalist - I still think most rifles should be loaded from the front.
Wait, High Wycombe? I used to work in Gerrard's Cross... partway to all those tiresome Chalfonts.
Thinking

Royston, UK

#172911 Jul 24, 2013
I saw newspaper used when I was a child, but there was always plain paper inside too.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Did they really use old newspapers? I always thought that was a kind of urban legend.
Here, years-and-years ago, there was a (now defunct) chain called "Aurthur Treacher's Fish n' Chips".
And they did line their serving trays (a little cardboard boat/basket thingy) with American-Inspector-approved paper.
But it had been euphemistically printed with "news". I used to read the "news", as it was all of the joke variety.
Alas, that chain did not survive the turmoil of the '80's.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#172914 Jul 24, 2013
Thinking wrote:
I've no control over which town BT reports me as posting from... but staggeringly enough, that is actually my local town. Just 24 minutes to Marylebone, these days.
"Ooh me Chalfonts!" - the best euphemism for haemorrhoids. Ever.
<quoted text>
Hehehe. I'd not heard that one.

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#172915 Jul 24, 2013
Believer wrote:
<quoted text>
Just jumped on. This is a good place for an Amen, I believe!
C'mon in, the water's fine!

You do know that her entire discourse is based on a fallacy called Pascal's Wager, don't you?

I didn't raise my children to think that a comforting 'white' lie is preferable to the truth or just to go along with the crowd.

Really, all science has is theories? Climb atop a tall building and test that pesky "theory" of gravity why don't you!

Psst....I've heard there are a few sharks in the water.....fair warning;0)

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#172916 Jul 24, 2013
Very well said. But again we are dealing with a person who can't honestly answer even the simplest question. He is unaware if Jesus was born in Mary and Joseph's home in Nazareth or in a manger in Bethlehem.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Funny how the actual way that God chooses to do things is indistinguishable from non-existence.

What is the *test* for the existence of a deity? What observations distinguish a universe with a deity from one without?

Here is another way to ask the question: what test could we perform that, if it goes the way that surprises you, would be sufficient to demonstrate to you that your deity does NOT exist? In what way is your belief falsifiable? How would you know if you are *wrong*?

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#172917 Jul 24, 2013
25or6to4 wrote:
<quoted text>
This exchange presumes that God is like a person; that God wants to communicate, has plans, and gets angry if we don't listen to his messages. Why should God be thought of as a person? Is it because we like to project our own experience of reality on some "ultimate reality?" Can God just be some little-understood force, without human emotions? Without human prejudices? Without needing to really "care" at all what goes on in our small brains? I think the major fault of all religions is that they construct an image of God to support pre-existing prejudices and desires. I cannot believe in any notion of God other than total. utter, and unapproachable mysteriousness.
Well said, Chicago. This presumed 'god' loves us, calls us 'His children' and our 'immortal souls' are the goal in a divine scavenger hunt?

I do appreciate the fact that 'He' granted us free will, I mean how much fun can a planet full of zombie worshippers be? The 'God works in mysterious ways' is simply a non answer. It is like telling a person who suffers from severe depression to 'snap out of it.'

Gotta admit though the power plays on people's fears seems to be pretty effective on some and that promised reward of eternal life has a lotta folk jumping through hoops. If I actually thought there was a god, there is no way I could worship such a manipulative, diabolical b@st@rd.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172918 Jul 24, 2013
Thinking wrote:
I saw newspaper used when I was a child, but there was always plain paper inside too.
<quoted text>
That makes sense... you need more than one layer.

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#172919 Jul 24, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Never fired a front-loader m'self.
(weird... Topix wanted to censor "bl#ck powder"...!)
Wow, Bob. You finally got a censor's warning from the Topixbot, this is a first for you, isn't it?

Black power, maybe? Hmmmmm......

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172920 Jul 24, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Very well said. But again we are dealing with a person who can't honestly answer even the simplest question. He is unaware if Jesus was born in Mary and Joseph's home in Nazareth or in a manger in Bethlehem.
<quoted text>
Just a brief post before I leave for the week:

You included "qualifiers" such as the word "honestly" and assumptions such as "unaware." I'll answer your question just to prove your assumption as incorrect as you are :)

Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Bethlehem is the "City of David."

You're attempting to create a contradiction where there isn't one.
So, either you're simply naive regarding cultural context and styles of writing between authors, or you're simply being obtuse. Either way you're incorrect. Archeology now shows that there were two (2) villages known as Bethlehem. One in Judea, and one in Galilee.

http://archive.archaeology.org/0511/abstracts...

Have a nice week.:D

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#172921 Jul 24, 2013
Lmfao!
scaritual wrote:
<The Dave Nelson> {*plays with spittle*}

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#172922 Jul 24, 2013
Well that mud man and run woman upset the sky wizard right Dave? He was so upset he had to send his son to be tortured and killed because a woman ate a magical apple!

..... Because a talking snake told her to......

Makes perfect sense to a senile clueless old loser like you eh?
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>"8. A source or beginning; a germ.
9. Offspring; progeny.
10. Family stock; ancestry.
11. Sperm; semen."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/seed

I didn't say you, dumbass.

You attempted to deflect the question.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#172923 Jul 24, 2013
That's so embarrassing. It's at times like that I wanna move to Switzerland or something.
Dave Nelson wrote:
http://washington.cbslocal.com /2013/07/23/poll-majority-of-a mericans-believe-god-played-ro le-in-human-evolution/

God and evolution.

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#172924 Jul 24, 2013
What about the scripture that says he was born in Mary and Joseph's house in Nazareth? Their house wasn't a manger over 100 miles away was it? No it couldn't be because they were traveling away from home... A city Nazareth that didn't exist until well into the second century... Cough... Cough...

Thanks for changing sock puppets and dancing at my command as soon as I returned... You said you were leaving for vacation about 23 hours ago. So nice to catch you in another lie.

BUSTED!:))
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>Just a brief post before I leave for the week:

You included "qualifiers" such as the word "honestly" and assumptions such as "unaware." I'll answer your question just to prove your assumption as incorrect as you are :)

Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Bethlehem is the "City of David."

You're attempting to create a contradiction where there isn't one.
So, either you're simply naive regarding cultural context and styles of writing between authors, or you're simply being obtuse. Either way you're incorrect. Archeology now shows that there were two (2) villages known as Bethlehem. One in Judea, and one in Galilee.

http://archive.archaeology.org/0511/abstracts...

Have a nice week.:D

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172925 Jul 24, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, Bob. You finally got a censor's warning from the Topixbot, this is a first for you, isn't it?
Black power, maybe? Hmmmmm......
I have no idea why it flagged "bl#ck powder" but replacing the vowel seemed to spoof it well enough.

But it's not the first time for me-- I typically go back and use a synonym or else deliberate misspelling (as in the above).

Since: Mar 11

Henderson, KY

#172926 Jul 24, 2013
Ya back then people got cities mixed up all the time! Nazareth... Bethlehem... Eh it's all got sand and unwashed inbreeds what's the difference eh?

Lmfao!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#172927 Jul 24, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Just a brief post before I leave for the week:
You included "qualifiers" such as the word "honestly" and assumptions such as "unaware." I'll answer your question just to prove your assumption as incorrect as you are :)
Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Bethlehem is the "City of David."
You're attempting to create a contradiction where there isn't one.
So, either you're simply naive regarding cultural context and styles of writing between authors, or you're simply being obtuse. Either way you're incorrect. Archeology now shows that there were two (2) villages known as Bethlehem. One in Judea, and one in Galilee.
http://archive.archaeology.org/0511/abstracts...
Have a nice week.:D
But **none** named Nazareth until nearly a century after the "blessed events".

So "Jesus of Nazareth" is a lie?

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 Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 1 hr dollarsbill 5,167
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr Thomas 85,770
How To Get To Heaven When You Die (Jan '17) Mon Eagle 12 - 115
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Jan 17 ChristineM 4,026
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Jan 16 Into The Night 5,146
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) Jan 15 Dogen 33,127
News Egypt's parliament takes serious actions to com... Jan 14 emperorjohn 1
More from around the web