Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 239426 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.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#184480 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed.
So you want a definition of a dream as a thing? Something not imagined?

I take it back.

I'm starting to think you ARE stupid.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#184481 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
HL said I should read between the lines with you.
I see nothing here worthy.
That's the problem.

Your problem.
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#184482 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
You hypocrite.
You have posted many-many **ugly** and false accusations at me, since I've been on this thread with you.
Many times.
And I foolishly thought you were a nice guy.
How **wrong** I was...
I'm so very hurt Bob that you would say such a thing. And I was petitioning congress to have a statue made of you in Washington. The inscription would read,“Bob, the only perfect human being. He was never mean or offensive. Never told a lie ever in his whole life. Just perfection to the core.”

But some in congress didn’t want a statue of a pile of bullsh*t. Go figure…..
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#184483 Nov 15, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. your American Express card is expiring at the end of the month ..
.. don't forget to renew it and e-mail me the new account number ..
It has been said that Happy Lesbo = Catcher1 and

Catcher1 = Happy Lesbo

When you talk to one you are talking to the other?

Could one person be both?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184484 Nov 15, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the problem.
Your problem.
Maybe it has something to do with you being an absolute genius...

I dunno...

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184485 Nov 15, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you want a definition of a dream as a thing? Something not imagined?
I take it back.
I'm starting to think you ARE stupid.
Banter is one thing, but your homosexual banter's starting to get a little weird.

I'm all out of cucumbers, man.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184486 Nov 15, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you want a definition of a dream as a thing? Something not imagined?
I take it back.
I'm starting to think you ARE stupid.
A dream is a thought, image or sensation occurring in your mind.

Are you implying that thoughts, images or sensations are not "things"?

Are you attempting to redefine yet another word?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184487 Nov 15, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. yes, words are important ..
.. if you say someone is dead, it can have a myriad of meanings. They may be physically, spiritually or intellectually dead ..
.. in America, an atheist may be described as someone who rejects the Abrahamic God ..
.. why is your interpretation of any word the correct one? I do not understand the logic. What does it accomplish ??..
(Response from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

In our understanding, the argument for this broader notion was
introduced into the philosophical literature by Antony Flew in 'The
Presumption of Atheism'(1972). In that work, he noted that he was
using an etymological argument to try to convince people NOT TO FOLLOW THE STANDARD MEANING [emphasis added] of the term. His goal was to REFRAME THE DEBATE [emphasis added] about the existence of God and to RE-BRAND ATHEISM AS A DEFAULT POSITION [emphasis added].
Not everyone has been convinced to use the term in Flew's way simply on the force of his argument. For some, who consider themselves atheists in the traditional sense, Flew's efforts seemed to be an attempt to WATER DOWN [emphasis added] a perfectly good concept. For others, who consider themselves agnostics in the traditional sense, Flew's efforts seemed to be an attempt to re-label them "atheists" -- a term they rejected.
All that said, we are continuing to examine the situation regarding the definitions as presented in this entry.

All the best,
Yours truly,

Uri Nodelman Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Senior Editor
Eagle 12

Troy, IL

#184488 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, the good ole atheist comeback; "you're just stupid".
If you have nothing thoughtful to add (proving dreams exist would be nice), the why bother posting at all?
That's their favorite play in the ole playbook alright.

But what can you expect from “Team Narcissism?”

These guys celebrate even when their losing.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184489 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you really want to go there? I want to limit my insults of Dave to the occasions in which he chooses to insult me. This isn't one of them, so I probably won't argue with you about him except to say that if you take this position, you're not making either of you look any better.
Suit yourself.

I wouldn't expect you to recognize genius, unless it had a humanist stamp on it.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184490 Nov 15, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's their favorite play in the ole playbook alright.
But what can you expect from “Team Narcissism?”
These guys celebrate even when their losing.
I gotta get me a copy of the Atheist's Handbook.
LCNLin

United States

#184491 Nov 15, 2013
"Proving a non-existent, fantasy-delusion (god) is real?

Would require a machine that could examine a person's **imagination**.

Because we all know (yes-- even YOU know--but are afraid to admit) that **your** god is **not** real."

Proving B*b overposts seems simple and is defended by is twin :-)

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184492 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism isn't a claim. It's an opinion about theists' claim and their evidence and arguments for gods, which I have rejected after careful consideration.
Furthermore, my rejection of your god - my atheism - is self evident. The proof of my atheism is that rejection
If you're waiting for a disproof of all gods, I can't give you one. I can disprove the claim that the Christian god exists, but not to somebody that has a stake in remaining a believer. I'd need your cooperation.
A disproof of gods were it possible would be superfluous anyway. I don't need one to reject unsupported, extraordinary claims, and faith is immune to evidence. So which of us would benefit from such a proof? Neither.
Notice that I don't ask you for a proof for your theism. I already know you don't have one.
No, atheism is a claim. A big one.

It is not an opinion about any other claim.

And you cannot disprove the Christian god, or any god.

This illustrates the importance of words and what they mean.

Any charlatan can support such claims as yours if he can appropriate to himself the power to decide the meaning of the terms.

All your word games are bluster. You won't stand up for the claim you make and defend it.

You hide behind linguistic fakery.

Act like a man.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#184493 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
A dream is a thought, image or sensation occurring in your mind.
Are you implying that thoughts, images or sensations are not "things"?
Are you attempting to redefine yet another word?
You are Thing One.

Skom is Thing Two.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184494 Nov 15, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
In my view, you are guilty, in your "belief" wordsmithing, of precisely what you accuse IANS and NightSerf of doing.
Then you didn't comprehend what I said.

I hold myself to the meaning of terms in the debate.

Others equivocate and water down, as the Stanford Senior Editor explained on "atheism", in order to gain an advantage.

And they're gonna' need it with me.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#184495 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not "my interpretation".
That's the point. I'm advocating the actual meaning of words, both historically and by the consensus of academic usage.
We don't get to make up meanings for words, and then use the fake meaning to gain a rhetorical edge.
Case in Point: If one wants to appear as a rational skeptic, but also wants to claim atheism, he is trying to have his cake and eat it too.
Why? Because skepticism is a suspended judgement. Atheism is a belief that no god exists - judgement rendered.
An atheist cannot be a skeptic on the issue, but he knows it makes him sound more rational if he were. You know how it goes:
"I'm an atheist. I rely on evidence. I evaluate it, sift it, and lo and behold, it is not convincing. But look at that dumb hick theist over there. He doesn't rely on evidence - he has a "belief".
Hence, the bull-shit-artist trying to have it both ways.
No, not a belief.
Faith.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184496 Nov 15, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your dishonest use of language leaves me in disbelief.
I am skeptical of your motive.
You don't know what you're talking about.

Maybe it's time to go to the gym.

And you'll have to define what you mean by "skeptical" for the others.

I know what it means.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#184497 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know what you're talking about.
Maybe it's time to go to the gym.
And you'll have to define what you mean by "skeptical" for the others.
I know what it means.
OK then.

Which amendment do you care to discuss, the First or the Fourteenth?

Better yet, how about we discuss the concept of separation of church and state?

No biggie, just suggestions as fodder for more wordsmithing.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184498 Nov 15, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
That's interesting, but easily refuted. The DNA of man and the 6 other extant great apes, especially the human chromosome 2 evidence, is the smoking gun proof that we all descended from a common ancestralpongid several million years ago. Hominins, man's taxon, separated from the chimps about 5-8 million years ago.
NO. It is evidence; not proof.

Sorry to pull word meanings on you again.

If you mean "evidence", maybe you should say "evidence" instead of "proof".

I know that's asking a lot, but the difference has huge ramifications.

A guy goes to jail on proof. The prosecution can fail with evidence.

Oh, but what the hell. We're among friends.

Let's just change it today - evidence is proof.

As you were.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#184499 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Typical atheist.
They deny God because there's no evidence but they accept dreams, intuition, ghosts & aliens....
And it's only the Christian God they deny. You very rarely see them discuss any other god except for jokes.
Hilarious.
They can't honestly Comprehend the Christian God, therefore why or even how could they move on to other Gods.

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 Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 17 min thetruth 7,477
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Zog Has-fallen 19,074
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 3 hr Thinking 2,218
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 4 hr Insults Are Easier 125
News Richard Dawkins insists he's not an angry athei... 7 hr Thinking 2
John 3:16 7 hr Thinking 2
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 7 hr Exodus771 7,502
More from around the web