Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 247760 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.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#176304 Sep 3, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a brain infection passed by memes. A disease called screaming memes. It affects those with insufficient development of their neural network. They can only be "educated" by rote.
I'll come back and respond to others later. I think part of the problem is they knocked The Gnostic Atheist off line. They not only gave a much better game, they did it with much better manners.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#176305 Sep 3, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
I just told you why. But feel free to com eup with new sub-theories to patch your theory.
Here is something for you and Polymath to consider.
Take a cylinder of oxygen or any other gas. Evacuate it to a partial vacuum. In this gravity well the remaining gas should collect at the bottom. You should have a pressure differential on the insides of the container between the top and bottom. Gravity on the nuclei. Pure and simple. I haven't researched this, but I suspect the gas will diffuse to an even pressure outwards in all directions. There may be a very tiny differential due to that gravity which will be affected by the Casimir effect, which would reduce that gravitational pull on the individual gas atoms, an internal to the cylinder condition and effect. However, this will not effect the total weight or mass of the cylinder barring any influence of that vacuum being transferred through the cylinder material. I believe what you will find is it is the EM repulsion that scatters the gas atoms. There is really nothing else to do such. Those atoms are spinning. That comes under the heading of motion. Balance of charge created by displacement of space. If you can polarize the spin from without you may see differences of internal pressure on the internal walls. And do not forget these relative pressure, or force may be a better word, differences are also affecting the internal structure of the cylinders themselves. Space goes everywhere.
That all goes under the heading of the conservation of mass and energy. No virtual particles needed.
<The Dave Nelson> " THAT was an example of my virtual intelligence..."

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#176306 Sep 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
But Dave has bought himself an imaginary ticket to get into the posh and cushy side of death after life.
LMAO! Yes, you'd think heaven, harps and streets of gold would be enough for some people. <The Dave> is continuing his oneup-manship even into the afterlife. Who'da thunk it???

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#176307 Sep 3, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> All of history assumes an ancient flood. The Bible is just one source. You have multiple independent sources for that event. The kings of Europe considered Noah a historical figure. Why should anyone believe the moderns over the kings of Europe? You do know this is a matter of human history and they were far closer to the event in question and kept records of their ancestry? Philo and Josephus had sources which predated their writings. Egyptian sources which validated the Exodus. If it is all myth then why the regulation? Slave regulation? Why slave regulation (for example) in a myth? Like i said the moderns are hostile to the Bible because it contradicts their assumptions and anything that contradicts is marginalized. Be it anyone today or the ancients. The moderns also ignore independent accounts of the flood. There is just too much there to dismiss. You have the Bible down as guilty until proven innocent? Perhaps someday someone will treat you the same way you treat the Bible. Guilty until proven innocent in a matter that will really cost you. You really won't have anything to complain about. You will only be getting a taste of your own medicine.
There have been a lot of floods my friend. Many ancient myths tell these stories, not just Christianity. They occurred at different times all over the world (floods do occur in plenty of places.) The ancient Greeks had a flood myth, so did the Mayans in South America.

I'll agree that the ancients were striving for truth and understanding in the best ways they knew how....at the time. Most Kings simply wanted to shore up the belief in "divine right" to rule. An excellent example of that is the KJV version of the bible, King James wanted to preserve his power and the secret passageway connecting his bedroom to his male lover's bedchambers is still intact. But I digress.

I've read the bible, cover to cover....no it is neither true or especially good literature. It's a mish-mash of contradictory authors cobbled together to try to make a point. It fails.

Don't warn me about your gawd's imaginary judgement from a poorly written book. If that's the best salvo you can fire.....you fail.

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#176308 Sep 3, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I like your theory, Dave.
The trick is to find your way to the top of the heap.
<The Dave> is obsessed with being numero uno in all things. Knowledge, physical prowess, unique experiences and prodigious physical attributes...ad nauseum.

Shhhhh.....don't ask him or he'll tell you.*wink* He's a regular Energizer Bunny in the hot air department.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#176309 Sep 3, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
<The Dave> is obsessed with being numero uno in all things. Knowledge, physical prowess, unique experiences and prodigious physical attributes...ad nauseum.
Shhhhh.....don't ask him or he'll tell you.*wink* He's a regular Energizer Bunny in the hot air department.
That is not true. I would never ever even consider trying to outdo you for bitchery.

It just isn't in my makeup.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#176310 Sep 3, 2013
xianity is EVIL wrote:
xianity is EVIL wrote:
and to sum up
Atheism is simply,,LACK of belief in god(s).
There is no belief required for atheism.
And since faith is “belief in something for which there is no proof” such as gods,how can an atheist, who has no positive belief need faith?
Answer is we do not... Atheism requires no faith.
Many theists will say; atheists must have faith that god does not exist”. That statement is false for a few reasons.
Most atheists are agnostic atheists,
and they do not completely rule out the existence of some kind of UNdefined god(s),
but rather, they find god(s) to be improbable, see no evidence that would indicate god-belief is rational, or both.
Faith does not play a role here, facts are whats important.
And just because we dont know how the universe or life originated does NOT prove gods existence,claiming that god created all,is an argument from Ignorance Fallacy.,,a belief without evidence!
Until theists prove god exist,its only rational to remain atheist
So Faith is not necesary to be atheist
<quoted text>
Off Topic Chunkyboy!
not that theres anything to discuss anyway,youve lost..
LLL
You may be right about not needing faith to be an atheist. In your case you do. I keeps you chatting about it. An atheist that would never partake in conversations like this one, most likely invest no thought on the topic, therefore no faith. This person would never compare. You and Little Red Bobbing Hood, cross the line from faithful to fanatics. You can't prove your belief, and with each post you prove you have faith. I don't think having faith is a bad thing.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#176311 Sep 3, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
But you *will* die and become worm meat. That is a simple fact. What you want is *in addition* that your consciousness continue after you die and become worm meat. But there is absolutely no reason to think that consciousness without brains is possible. So you come to the wall separating your desires from the facts and you choose the comfortable desires rather than the uncomfortable facts.
Thank God I am not an Atheist.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#176312 Sep 3, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, string theory is *speculation*. But it is a leading condender because it is one of the few proposals that combines quantum mechanics and general relativity in a natural way. There are even results that suggest that *any* proposal that combines these two must have the general outline of string theory (this is controversial, though).
What is true, though, is that the position that there is an all powerful creator for the universe has no evidence in its support. Nothing that we see in this universe points to an intelligent creator. We see laws of physics that operate to produce all the structure we see around us.
Now, is it *possible* there is a multi-dimensional race of creatures that has learned the technology of how to produce universes out of the quantum background? It is *possible* that our universe is one of the universes created by such a multi-dimensional race? The answer to both questions is *yes*. But, I would assert, this has *nothing* to do with your conceptions of deities. These multi-dimensional beings would NOT be 'all powerful', or 'all knowing' and certainly would *not* be 'determiners of morals'. They would be intelligent beings with a certain technology and acting through the laws of physics.
Now, what was *your* speculation again?
I disagree, and I believe as most scientist that discuss it on The Discovery Channel that Quantum Physics proves there is a God.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#176315 Sep 3, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
There have been a lot of floods my friend. Many ancient myths tell these stories, not just Christianity. They occurred at different times all over the world (floods do occur in plenty of places.) The ancient Greeks had a flood myth, so did the Mayans in South America.
I'll agree that the ancients were striving for truth and understanding in the best ways they knew how....at the time. Most Kings simply wanted to shore up the belief in "divine right" to rule. An excellent example of that is the KJV version of the bible, King James wanted to preserve his power and the secret passageway connecting his bedroom to his male lover's bedchambers is still intact. But I digress.
I've read the bible, cover to cover....no it is neither true or especially good literature. It's a mish-mash of contradictory authors cobbled together to try to make a point. It fails.
Don't warn me about your gawd's imaginary judgement from a poorly written book. If that's the best salvo you can fire.....you fail.
Critics have the Bible down as myth until proven true. The moderns were wrong on a number of assumptions including David and the non existence of certain locations mentioned in the New. They were wrong about the late dating of Go John. These are just a few things. It is the moderns who marginalize everyone and claim they are right including the Kings of Europe. They are just hostile towards Scripture and God depicted. Their only real interest is protecting their atheism. I don't know why you would consider my example a warning. Just saying by your standard of measure it may be measured out to you.

Modern history gives ancient documents the benefit of the doubt and has methods to glean information for historical purposes. You come in here, take a few cheap shots and then bug out. I don't see any substantial arguments coming from your posts. A lot of claims. You really don't have any to make. The Kings of Europe had some ulterior motive for example. Did you pull that one out from where the sun does not shine? Where is your evidence? Fact being they believed they came from Noah and you have nothing from history to counter except unfounded accusations. LOL!

“Input”

Since: Dec 10

Input

#176316 Sep 3, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree, and I believe as most scientist that discuss it on The Discovery Channel that Quantum Physics proves there is a God.
Cite reference to what program, or scientist who said that.
We all know some scientists believe, but more often than not the scientist's words are twisted around or used out of context by creationists to support their own belief.
So you saying the above has very little value, or meaning without showing their words and not yours.. but I can tell you this. That very little physicists or cosmologists believe in god the way you think of a god. Some may make reference to "god" meaning anything beyond human understanding at the present, but you can count the percentage of believers with one hand when it comes to the hard sciences and belief in you bible god.
EXPERT

Cottonwood, CA

#176317 Sep 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Cite reference to what program, or scientist who said that.
We all know some scientists believe, but more often than not the scientist's words are twisted around or used out of context by creationists to support their own belief.
So you saying the above has very little value, or meaning without showing their words and not yours.. but I can tell you this. That very little physicists or cosmologists believe in god the way you think of a god. Some may make reference to "god" meaning anything beyond human understanding at the present, but you can count the percentage of believers with one hand when it comes to the hard sciences and belief in you bible god.
You are so full of it...
xianity is EVIL

Windsor, Canada

#176318 Sep 3, 2013
followerofSatan wrote:
<quoted text>
of course it does....in your head, anything is possible...that's the beauty of having a minimal IQ.....
http://imageshack.us/a/img375/3484/brainx.jpg
that one is a PATHOLOGICAL Liar,,or mentaly retarded..probably both

“Input”

Since: Dec 10

Input

#176319 Sep 3, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text>Critics have the Bible down as myth until proven true. The moderns were wrong on a number of assumptions including David and the non existence of certain locations mentioned in the New. They were wrong about the late dating of Go John. These are just a few things. It is the moderns who marginalize everyone and claim they are right including the Kings of Europe. They are just hostile towards Scripture and God depicted. Their only real interest is protecting their atheism. I don't know why you would consider my example a warning. Just saying by your standard of measure it may be measured out to you.
Modern history gives ancient documents the benefit of the doubt and has methods to glean information for historical purposes. You come in here, take a few cheap shots and then bug out. I don't see any substantial arguments coming from your posts. A lot of claims. You really don't have any to make. The Kings of Europe had some ulterior motive for example. Did you pull that one out from where the sun does not shine? Where is your evidence? Fact being they believed they came from Noah and you have nothing from history to counter except unfounded accusations. LOL!
Medieval people including Kings weren't noted as being particularly smart, in fact most were very poorly educated.
Most of all science was wrong and distorted by religion.
In fact religion was the binding power of the Kingdom, so your point is that those who were uneducated , knew very little real science, who were highly religious thought they were something they were not. Bravo, you have proven yourself to be as ignorant as them.

“Input”

Since: Dec 10

Input

#176320 Sep 3, 2013
EXPERT wrote:
<quoted text>
You are so full of it...

Then cite reference to the quantum physicist that say's quantum physics prove there's a god. Should be just that easy, or maybe it isn't huh?

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#176321 Sep 3, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Definition of theory (n)
Bing Dictionary
the·o·ry
[ th&#63484; &#601;ree ]
1.rules and techniques: the body of rules, ideas, principles, and techniques that applies to a subject, especially when seen as distinct from actual practice
2.speculation: abstract thought or contemplation
3.idea formed by speculation: an idea of or belief about something arrived at through speculation or conjecture
Speculation. There are those that when they speculate it gets a lot of respect. A proven theory is a fact. If the right person has a theory the wheels of research begins. It is to be respected but it is not prove. In regards to String. There are many different theories, as I mentioned as a whole it is either amongst the most respect or the most respected.
I'm sorry...I think I was confused about what you were speaking of. In my previous posts I was talking about the big bang theory being fact.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#176322 Sep 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Medieval people including Kings weren't noted as being particularly smart, in fact most were very poorly educated.
Most of all science was wrong and distorted by religion.
In fact religion was the binding power of the Kingdom, so your point is that those who were uneducated , knew very little real science, who were highly religious thought they were something they were not. Bravo, you have proven yourself to be as ignorant as them.
Yeah the moderns are the smartest persons in the room and they are right and everybody else is dumb because they don't see things the way the moderns do. LOL! Is that an argument! LOL!

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#176323 Sep 3, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text>Critics have the Bible down as myth until proven true. The moderns were wrong on a number of assumptions including David and the non existence of certain locations mentioned in the New. They were wrong about the late dating of Go John. These are just a few things. It is the moderns who marginalize everyone and claim they are right including the Kings of Europe. They are just hostile towards Scripture and God depicted. Their only real interest is protecting their atheism. I don't know why you would consider my example a warning. Just saying by your standard of measure it may be measured out to you.
Modern history gives ancient documents the benefit of the doubt and has methods to glean information for historical purposes. You come in here, take a few cheap shots and then bug out. I don't see any substantial arguments coming from your posts. A lot of claims. You really don't have any to make. The Kings of Europe had some ulterior motive for example. Did you pull that one out from where the sun does not shine? Where is your evidence? Fact being they believed they came from Noah and you have nothing from history to counter except unfounded accusations. LOL!
You are a bad Christian.
I asked you what the devil looks like, and you ignored me.
Wait until judgment day.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#176324 Sep 3, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps the creator or nature has planned it this way. Knowing oneself is one of the oldest philosophies. My case by case theory as I have admitted here, and it didn't take a heat lamp or power tools to get it out of me. With out doubt will never be able to be proven. I stand by it until someone else could prove what they have. That will not happen in this life time I am now enjoying.
If there is a creator then it is certainly possible that they may have planned it that way. I, myself, doubt that...but it is simply because I do not have a belief in a "god". However, if you are correct in your belief, then I actually do hope that you get to see the second coming, and then there will be no doubt on the rights and wrongs of creation ;)

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#176325 Sep 3, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll come back and respond to others later. I think part of the problem is they knocked The Gnostic Atheist off line. They not only gave a much better game, they did it with much better manners.
Did you mean to say Agnostic Atheist? Most Gnostic Atheists that I have spoken with and have watched conversations from have pretty bad manners sometimes....Or I guess a better way to put it would be to say that they don't have the best people skills because frustration gets the better of them. Of course this is just my opinion.

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 In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 25 min Thinking 47,904
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 hr Thinking 12,908
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 2 hr thetruth 2,358
News As an atheist, how do I maintain my relationshi... 2 hr Thinking 60
News Atheism, the Bible and sexual orientation 3 hr Thinking 30
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Wed macumazahn 20,900
Proof of God for the Atheist Wed Amused 130
More from around the web