Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258484 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

Redondo Beach, CA

#184844 Nov 16, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Is that what a skom is?... A lotioned up cucumber?
It used to be pickles.

Skom grew the pickles intto cucumbers.

He and RiversideRacist enjoy that sort of banter.

Who understands Christians?

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#184845 Nov 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, Catch is a grown man.
Sticking a lotioned up cucumber up his ass is not pedophelia.
Why did you do that for? You perv!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184846 Nov 16, 2013
Bongo wrote:
if you don't assert there is no God youre not an atheist.
I don't assert that there is no god, but I call myself an atheist because I am not a theist. Is that OK with you?
Bongo wrote:
A real atheist wouldn't spend mush time in forums like this, only those seeking proof , contradicting Gods mandate, only by faith.
I'm a real atheist, and intend to spend a fair amount of time here if the conversation remains sufficiently stimulating. Is that OK?

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#184847 Nov 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, Catch is a grown man.
Sticking a lotioned up cucumber up his ass is not pedophelia.
That's your fantasy.

Your reality is spanking babies, hitting wives, calling black people monkeys.

I'm sure your Jesus is very proud of you.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184848 Nov 16, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Dave's a chick magnet or something like that.
His south pole repels them.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184849 Nov 16, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks. I reserve the right to unatheistize, in the event a god touches me on the head a la RR.
I do not believe anything "survives" beyond physical death: There may be a corpse, or ashes, and memories for those still alive, but in the sense of a continuation of any sort, in any form, as in a soul or its equivalent, no. To me, death ends the process. Our allotted time here, or anywhere, has expired. And by the way, I'm very comfortable so believing.
I am not aware of any evidence to the contrary.
But you know me, I'm always open to consider evidence.
An honest annunciation.

Good. Around here that's refreshing.

The aforementioned evidence is available, but requires study.

Your stated position suggests you would not invest the time.
Anon

Lakewood, OH

#184850 Nov 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It is your opinion that God is nonexistent that prevents you from experiencing Him.
Utilize your common sense and logic. Tell me how that's got you convinced that God is nonexistent.
Nothing...ever...happens. Nothing. Nothing even remotely supernatural has ever occurred in all my years of walking this silly little planet populated by highly superstitious and unfinished creatures a.k.a. as human beings. 2000 plus years of nothing but unsubstantiated claims as to the power and wonder of your god, but not one trace of hard evidence. Nothing. I need more, a lot more, than nothing...

Why has god stopped showing himself as he did in the OT? He was never shy about sending angels earthward, throwing thunderbolts, destroying cities, you know, tangible evidence - something people could actually point to and say, "See, God's real." Did Jesus force his father into anger management classes?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184851 Nov 16, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be making the argument that the people who disagree with one another have a better handle on what the authentic nature of reality is than those who agree.
Here's a question that I posed to Eagle < http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T... >, which he either never saw or chose to ignore. I'll offer it to you now:
You and the rest of your ten man detail are on maneuvers in an Afghani desert when an explosion kills three of your squad, and leaves you blind and limping. Two three-man details leave you and go in opposite directions in search of water.
They each return to you claiming that they have seen water in the distance, are planning to go to the water, and will help you get there with them since you are not expected to survive long enough for them to return with water for you.
Both groups swear that they have seen water, but it's very hot out, they're dehydrated, and you realize that one or both groups might be seeing things - a mirage. Which will you follow, and how can you decide? In other words, is there a way to decide when a group of people claim to see something whether they actually do or not? How can you decide which one is describing reality?
This is probably pretty easy, but in case it's not, a full discussion will follow your answer - assuming that you give one.
I'd follow the one who looks cool and smiling like he's in an air-conditioned penthouse.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184852 Nov 16, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Why did you do that for? You perv!
To correct you.

I made a comment about you pedophelia thinking atheists and you reported my cucumber comment about Catch.

You stand corrected.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184853 Nov 16, 2013
**reported** should be **reposted**

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184854 Nov 16, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's your fantasy.
Your reality is spanking babies, hitting wives, calling black people monkeys.
I'm sure your Jesus is very proud of you.
More proud that watching you lie your way through life.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184855 Nov 16, 2013
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing...ever...happens. Nothing. Nothing even remotely supernatural has ever occurred in all my years of walking this silly little planet populated by highly superstitious and unfinished creatures a.k.a. as human beings. 2000 plus years of nothing but unsubstantiated claims as to the power and wonder of your god, but not one trace of hard evidence. Nothing. I need more, a lot more, than nothing...
Why has god stopped showing himself as he did in the OT? He was never shy about sending angels earthward, throwing thunderbolts, destroying cities, you know, tangible evidence - something people could actually point to and say, "See, God's real." Did Jesus force his father into anger management classes?
Because we don't live in OT times.

They were pre-Jesus.

We are post-Jesus.

Get with the times.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184856 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
You have not, and cannot, disprove the god.
Not to you. But you make decisions base on faith. I have nothing to offer that can overcome that.

"Faith transcends reason the way a criminal transcends the law." - Pat Condell
Buck Crick wrote:
You should have known someone would come along smart enough to call you on the subterfuge.
Were you referring to yourself? Please don't make me be more immodest than I am. I am really trying hard to rein it in.
Buck Crick wrote:
Leonard Mlodinow, Quantum Physicist, Atheist, co-author with Stephen Hawking: "As a scientist, I can tell you, science cannot tell you either way whether there is a god or not a god". I think Dr. Mlodinow knows more about what science can do than you.
Why do you think that is relevant? Are you assuming "a god" means the Christian god?
Buck Crick wrote:
Now you can hedge and admit you can't disprove "god", but can disprove a particular god, as in the christian god.
That is my claim.
Buck Crick wrote:
No, you can't. You can only disprove alleged incidents and descriptions made by human beings. Then, as is the habit, you will try to drown the distinctions in a sea of unrelated words.
By human beings? Who wrote the Word of God. If it wasn't a god toss it out.

Are you still wondering why I say that you function like a Christian?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184857 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
You are wrong. God or no god, there are other reasonable explanations for the characteristics of chromosome 2.
Common ancestry is one explanation. It surprises no one that it is the favorite. Your statement of "proof" is incorrect.
Thanks once again for sharing your unsupported opinions. You know how we all treasure them.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#184858 Nov 16, 2013
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing...ever...happens. Nothing. Nothing even remotely supernatural has ever occurred in all my years of walking this silly little planet populated by highly superstitious and unfinished creatures a.k.a. as human beings. 2000 plus years of nothing but unsubstantiated claims as to the power and wonder of your god, but not one trace of hard evidence. Nothing. I need more, a lot more, than nothing...
Why has god stopped showing himself as he did in the OT? He was never shy about sending angels earthward, throwing thunderbolts, destroying cities, you know, tangible evidence - something people could actually point to and say, "See, God's real." Did Jesus force his father into anger management classes?
Perhaps that God decided to quit going to them and gave them the opportunity for them to come to him, at great personal sacrifice. Can get tiresome destroying and throwing thunderbolts, etc.

The Jesus story is of a god that invested a part of itself in its creation that it vowed to not destroy again. It felt the pain its creations did. God grew in its understanding also.

If you want to be an intellectual start thinking more deeply.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184859 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
I wasn't dissent. It was insult. I won't invest the time in explaining the difference.
It's your choice to feel personally insulted when I reject one of your sources, not an inevitability. I will always reject Christian apologists. I am too familiar by now with their motives, ethics, and tactics. If you want to cite a reference, choose one that isn't Christian, or p¿be prepared to be personally offended when I reject it.

The fact is that there is absolutely nothing known only to Christians, and anything worth saying can be found in a mutually acceptable resource. If you can only find it coming from a Christian or a Christian site, don't bother me with it.

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#184860 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
An honest annunciation.
Good. Around here that's refreshing.
The aforementioned evidence is available, but requires study.
Your stated position suggests you would not invest the time.
Thanks.

You told me some time ago that you found me to be honest.

"Misguided" though.

I agree with you on one of your two assessments.

And you are correct; although I reserve the option to reconsider if I encounter evidence of the supernatural, I have no interest in searching for such evidence, by study or other endeavor.

I believe our focus should be on our life, here and now.

But I do enjoy the spirituality of the Romantic poets: Keats, Shelley, Byron, Coleridge, Wordsworth.
It adds a dimension to our human experience.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#184861 Nov 16, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are taught what is the proper method in evaluating your evidence by the movement.
You love to mock my EM, IANS, but the forces and interactions I describe are hard facts. It is just that I have a different perspective of how to view them that varies from how you were trained to view them, which means you can't understand the logic that is actually in them. I am the freethinker. You are the one that thinks they are one.
They do not understand what you are saying, Dave.

So they pretend they do, and ridicule it.

They see with eyes and hear with ears, identifying themselves with the image.

You identify you - the one hearing and seeing.

They say "I am X"

You don't identify with X. You identify with "I am".

An experience that shakes a person, like near-death, disentangles the identity "I Am" from the nightmare of form. A new dimension of consciousness arrives, and you yield to it, you open up.

You will be aligned with consciousness itself, not the objects of consciousness.

You wait and rest there. In the peace of God.

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#184862 Nov 16, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
More proud that watching you lie your way through life.
Sorry, dude.

You lose--again.

I have yet to tell a lie.

If you disagree, show me the evidence.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#184863 Nov 16, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
This is what I was referring to.
When it suits, you call things something totally different than what they clearly are.
This was one of what Aristotle called "Sophisms" of argument. The verbal sophism is the use of improper terms.
Thank you yet again for your unsupported opinions. I will file them with the others.

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) 3 min Dogen 58,102
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 7 min IB DaMann 27,281
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 11 hr Dogen 1,904
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 11 hr Eagle 12 5,962
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 12 hr Eagle 12 4,947
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 12 hr Eagle 12 1,940
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) 15 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 153
More from around the web