Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 257124 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.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#175892 Aug 30, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
BTW, Hiding, you do not have any skin in this game of life. I believe you said you don't have children. You have created no hostages to the system you are trying to create. Let me say that adopted children are also not your legacy. Some will assume so to justify their selfish actions.
Lots more fun when you don't have those hostages. Your thoughts don't advance mankind, it is those babies that have to grow up in what you left. Trust their parents to be more careful with their changes than an ideologue.
Your ego won't let you see what you are doing.
With that, I am going to bed.
<The Dave Nelson> " WAIT!..WHERE DID MY CHIN GO...!? Oh, never mind, the video cam was pointed at my belly..."
EXPERT

Redding, CA

#175893 Aug 30, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
The universe was an uncaused event.
Under Quantum Mechanics? Pretty much **everything** is uncaused at that level.
Since the entire universe is based on quantum mechanics? It's obviously not caused either.
That right there eliminates your Magic JuJu Beast who waves his wand and *poofs* the universe into being.
You are an idiot!

Mathematically proven debunked.

Violates the laws of science.

That position is not held in the mainstream.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#175894 Aug 30, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
You are being stupid. No one is objective.
Is your statement objective?
Anyone who claims an objective position is either lying, naive or unintelligent.
So your statement is subjective? Why believe you?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#175895 Aug 30, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
Is your statement objective? <quoted text> So your statement is subjective? Why believe you?
Is the best you can do word-play? Is that your best? So far you've been unable to dismiss that both the Christian religion and how people experience and interpret the Christian deities change throughout history and culture.

I'm starting to think the above is what constitutes high debate from you.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#175896 Aug 30, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>I feel your frustration.
Not frustrated.
This issue forces you to face a daunting choice. No matter the issue, it's the same choice many of us have had to face. You can hide behind waffling self-affirming rationalization,
What rationalization?
It's either the Word of God, or it's the word of man.
Not the choice.
The word of man would do something eerily similar to your position, e.g., "Slavery is regulated...", and, "God lets us go our own way and deal with the consequences."
Regulated for the benefit of the slave/servant. If you believe the Bible supports or approves of slavery, abuse of slave then make your case.
Did you spend one moment to consider what you've proposed? I think not. You've used some innocuous, generic pronouns - "us" and "our" - and they provide comforting cover from the reality hidden behind them. These are living, breathing humans behind those faceless pronouns. "Us" can be those that enslave their brothers, and "we" are those who are blessed to live in misery, and die, as "consequence". Could there be a more horrid example of the injustice of your God's apparent lassitude?
More moralizing and God blaming. Just can't grasp the concept.
The Word of a transcendent God would, please God, rise above human feckless foibles and false flatteries. It would demand that humanity look up, not sideways. It would surely set a bar above that which we can easily and falsely prescribe for ourselves. It would, please God, be the epitome of justice and goodwill.
The Word of a transcendent God would not flaccidly accept and deign to "regulate" man's weaknesses and injustices. It would not ask us to worship that which accepts and "regulates" our own craven inability to rise above our own venal inhumanity.
By your own tacit admission above, for all it's lofty claims, the Bible does not rise above the level of man. Word of God? Many hope surely not.
Stop crying like a bitch. You select quoted from one of my posts and ignored others which would have added context. Like this.
I have no problem with God depicted. I do not find Him repulsive nor do i blame God for things we bring on ourselves especially when He warns us in advance. I do find it bizarre folks like you find slavery as depicted in Scripture so repulsive while you practically ignore it everywhere else. Justin addresses a despicable type in His first apology 27
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/richardson/fathers.x ...
Slavery was universal and far more cruel and inhumane then the regulated slavery depicted in the Old Testament. Corporal punishment was a normal form of punishment in the ancient world. You are unbelievable hypocrites when you whine about slavery depicted in the Bible, besides that most are biblical illiterates. They don't know what they are talking about and really don't want to learn anything. God depicted in Scripture always works withing the system to bring about results. Including slavery. You have zero objective basis to condemn slavery and your problem is more the Bible than actual slavery. Slavery is just a means to rant at the Bible.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#175897 Aug 30, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Is the best you can do word-play? Is that your best? So far you've been unable to dismiss that both the Christian religion and how people experience and interpret the Christian deities change throughout history and culture.
I'm starting to think the above is what constitutes high debate from you.
If you are going to make logically incoherent statements then you are going top be called on them.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#175898 Aug 30, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
Slavery was universal and far more cruel and inhumane then the regulated slavery depicted in the Old Testament.
Oh right - your "almighty, perfectly moral deity, the source of all human morality" wasn't capable of setting a better example. In your mind "God" just figured "well, I can do a little better, but I certainly can't share real morality with these people."
God depicted in Scripture always works withing the system to bring about results. Including slavery.
hahaha! So he's impotent at effecting change and yet you worship this "deity."
You have zero objective basis to condemn slavery and your problem is more the Bible than actual slavery. Slavery is just a means to rant at the Bible.
We have zero objective basis to condemn slavery???

Could you make a more repulsive statement? You think slavery is a moral goodness? Well, you must. After all your deity tried to make slavery better.

It's amazing that you will compromise your humanity, your morality, for this imagined being you so dearly love. I already gave you the argument from analogy - you know it would be awful to be a slave, but here you are, claiming we can't dare to say it's actually immoral and wrong.

You are right now arguing that slavery is acceptable. Your arguments mirror the arguments from Christian slavers throughout history.

Yes, your belief system is repulsive. No wonder it was used to justify slavery - and so many other atrocities.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#175899 Aug 30, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> If you are going to make logically incoherent statements then you are going top be called on them.
My statement is logically sound. Yours are lacking.

I wrote that no one can is capable of objectivity. and you wrote:
lightbeamrider wrote:
Is your statement objective?
A stupid, misleading question because I wasn't talking about the objectivity of statements, but people. You are confusing truth statements in logical discussions with objectivity. I'm not surprised, given the paucity of your intellect.

Then you compound your error by confusing the statement with the person, along with confusing truth with objectivity again:
So your statement is subjective? Why believe you?
No one can be objective. The best we can do is use methodologies that are designed to remove observer bias - the tools of science.

Religion never does this. It's absolutely biased b/c its goal is not to produce knowledge, but to support a belief system. When all your energy is directed to supporting dogmatic belief systems, you are the furthest thing from objective that you can be.

We have wonderful examples of you explaining that slavery cannot be said to be objectively immoral above. That's false. We can logically demonstrate that slavery is immoral, based on the way in which I defined morality above - through the argument of analogy and the human rights to freedom and fulfillment.

It's telling you aren't capable of that, and worse that you claim our morality is derived from a deity that condones slavery. Nothing could be more despicable.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#175900 Aug 30, 2013
EXPERT wrote:
<quoted text>You are an idiot!
Mathematically proven debunked.
Violates the laws of science.
That position is not held in the mainstream.
Your source?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#175901 Aug 30, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Oh right - your "almighty, perfectly moral deity, the source of all human morality" wasn't capable of setting a better example. In your mind "God" just figured "well, I can do a little better, but I certainly can't share real morality with these people."
More ranting against a God you do not believe exists.
hahaha! So he's impotent at effecting change and yet you worship this "deity."
Not depicted as impotent. If you are going to rant against a God you do not believe exists then at least get the depiction right.
We have zero objective basis to condemn slavery???
If there is no God and there is no accountability to God then there is no rational objective basis to oppose slavery which carries any real weight. Slavery has historical precedent. It is part of human history and conforms with the laws of nature where the strong dominate the weak. I noticed you ignored Justin quote. No surprise there.
Could you make a more repulsive statement?
This is what i mean by emotional reactions from you. This has nothing to do with logic. Try to keep your emotions in check and look at things objectively, like a professional. Your emotional appeals come off as sophomoric.
You think slavery is a moral goodness?
No. It was a reality. There is different types. I would say your hypocrisy on the subject is a moral outrage.
Well, you must. After all your deity tried to make slavery better.
It's amazing that you will compromise your humanity, your morality, for this imagined being you so dearly love. I already gave you the argument from analogy - you know it would be awful to be a slave, but here you are, claiming we can't dare to say it's actually immoral and wrong.
Your argument from analogy is subjective. The argument from nature where the strong dominate the weak carries more weight. There is no reason to help the weak anymore than there is reason to outlaw legal abortion in a world without God. Both positions are equally valid. I have pointed this out. Please do try and keep up. Note taking might be helpful.
You are right now arguing that slavery is acceptable.
Your arguments mirror the arguments from Christian slavers throughout history.
And you agree with them. We have been through that. Southern slavery argued for the type in which slaves were considered extended family [according to your wiki source] and were treated humanely. They were allowed to marry, have children, attend church, a place to live. They were cared for in their old age. They were not mutilated as children for the purposes of sodomy as depicted in the Justin quote. They were not taken as children and forced into prostitution. The south argued for none of that since that would have been abuse of power. In a world without God you have no real objective argument to invalidate the law of nature argument where to strong dominate the weak.
Yes, your belief system is repulsive. No wonder it was used to justify slavery - and so many other atrocities.
Oh please. Today they are using poison gas in Syria. Atrocities do not need Biblical justification. Atrocities can be justified for any reason or no reason. A couple of kids killed an athlete because they were bored here is the USA. You simply don't like the Bible. Come clean and admit your hypocrisy.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#175902 Aug 30, 2013
LCNlin wrote:
<quoted text>
Old theology "cherry picked" as usual,
rather than a defense of the atheist religion.
Science is silent on atheism,
And the bible is very vocal on science.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#175903 Aug 30, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Oh right - your "almighty, perfectly moral deity, the source of all human morality" wasn't capable of setting a better example. In your mind "God" just figured "well, I can do a little better, but I certainly can't share real morality with these people."
lightbeamrider wrote:
More ranting against a God you do not believe exists.
What part of "in your mind" do you fail to understand?
Not depicted as impotent. If you are going to rant against a God you do not believe exists then at least get the depiction right.
You quite clearly depicted the object of your worship as impotent, lacking power, unable to affect change.

The reality is that your deity is imagined. You therefore imbue its image with anything that will support your belief system as a person. Whatever LB thinks is ok, your imagined deity supports. Why? Because it's the product of your imagination.

And you'll do any number of mental gymnastics to keep your imagined deity a subjective reality for you. We saw that very clearly with your pathetic and immoral support of slavery.

So I have a challenge for you, LB. Go become a slave. Head off to Africa and demand that you be stripped of all your belongings so you can work alongside other slaves in the chocolate industry. Or New York or any brothel.

Tell us how uplifting and pleasant your life is afterwards, and don't forget to thank your ancient mythological text for describing the "better" ways in which slaves should be treated.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#175904 Aug 30, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
BTW, Hiding, you do not have any skin in this game of life. I believe you said you don't have children. You have created no hostages to the system you are trying to create. Let me say that adopted children are also not your legacy. Some will assume so to justify their selfish actions.
Lots more fun when you don't have those hostages. Your thoughts don't advance mankind, it is those babies that have to grow up in what you left. Trust their parents to be more careful with their changes than an ideologue.
Your ego won't let you see what you are doing.
With that, I am going to bed.
Stay there.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175905 Aug 30, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know if anyone says anything about me really. I've spoken to many people on here, but I usually don't have too much trouble :) I was confused by one of your sentences.... "We is you and that mouse in your pocket. You know yourself, you don't know me." What did this mean?
I wouldn't mind if you were complaining. I have complained about people on here many times.:) It's understandable even if you were.
It's very simple. The Atheist does know themselves, as does anyone else. When they say "We have no souls." It is correct. I am just not part of their we. I make no assumptions for you. They live without God. So be it.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175906 Aug 30, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Here? You reveal your true bigotry.
Classic.
Hypocrisy, I say. You would vote for a Atheist over a theist. My statement is based on political views. Why stop here Bob, let's call all straight line voters bigot.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175907 Aug 30, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
**I** do not need convincing.
But you appear to need it very much... why?
I don't need any more convincing, however as I do have more time left. I do make some adjustments to my beliefs. If I did say yes period. You would not believe me any how. I don't get how you go on talking to someone you don't believe at all. You may as well get an empty chair like Clint Eastward did. It may even be more becoming.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#175908 Aug 30, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Hypocrisy, I say. You would vote for a Atheist over a theist. My statement is based on political views. Why stop here Bob, let's call all straight line voters bigot.
Wait, wait - you'd vote for somebody who's irrational over someone who's rational?

Weird.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175909 Aug 30, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't read 90% of your shytty posts, actually.
But you do demonstrate all the trappings of a True Believer™.
Which, naturally, includes a near-total ignorance of your **sole** basis for your faith-- the bible in all it's ugliness.
So this is hardly helping your case.
This is your main problem. You are more about maintaining your assumptions than you are about learning anything. If you want to learn about The Old Testament walk out that front door and find a Rabbi. They are nice and friendly people. He would make time to discuss this with you. I actually tell you. Not only am I not an expert, but The Bible is not part religion. I respect it as ancient writings. For us to post about it makes a mockery of both of us. You truly are the most closed minded person I have chatted with, as previously mentioned I would not be surprised if you have no friends waiting on the other side of that door.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175910 Aug 30, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Here? You demonstrate your own deceitful attitude-- you presume that **everyone** is as deceitful as **you**...
... interesting.
But anyone with a minor level of intelligence will easily see I am my own person, and blacklagoon is his own.
We don't sound remotely alike.
You assume again. I find it hard to believe both of you have such poor comprehension skills.

When I post. "You can not prove The universe was started with or without a creator" I give you reason a.------ reason b.------ and reason c. The answer is in the statement. "(You can't prove The Universe was started) with or without a creator"

The answer was as I showed you. You can't prove period, how The Universe was started. Even if you don't agree with that answer. Which I off course don't see how you can't, even Stephen Hawking, whom clearly would love to drive your point home states that. You are a waste of people's time for this reason.

That is why I believe you multi log on ID. No great plot, nothing against me or people you talk to. It is because you have built walls around yourself, and now you have too much time on hands. The great conspiracy is you need to go out.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#175911 Aug 30, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Wait, wait - you'd vote for somebody who's irrational over someone who's rational?
Weird.
He brought it up, I really don't care. I just won't vote for worm meat.

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 38 min SoE 45,520
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Eagle 12 20,246
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 2 hr Paul WV-Uncle Sam 306
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 2 hr Eagle 12 21,393
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 5 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 10,334
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 7 hr Thinking 545
News How to Fight Extremism with Atheism 7 hr Thinking 2
More from around the web