Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#185155 Nov 17, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I dissent.
Physical violence has kept me housed and fed.
And people who know of me give a wide swath.
Understood. It works for some folks.

I used to be very violent, it helped change me into the man I am today.

But nowadays I have no reason to be violent anymore.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#185156 Nov 17, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Disbelief and lack of belief are not "essentially" the same.
You are dead wrong, Dipshit.
"Disbelief" is the presence of something, not the absence of something.
"Lack of belief" is the absence of something.
"Atheism" is the presence of something - belief that no god exists.
Absence of belief is not atheism.
Atheism is an affirmative position of belief.
Atheism is as much a belief as theism.
Correct.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185157 Nov 17, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Palin considers it satire as long as you don't say "effing retards". I'm not sure how she feels about touchy-feely euphemisms like "special needs," however
Hey! You reminded me of a joke. Would you like to hear it?
It wasn't funny the first, second, or third time.

I'll try not to be so touchy-feely from here on.

Starting now,...

Bill Maher is a lying, crooked nosed, little leftist ass wipe who pretends he thinks of jokes while a team is working round the clock to feed him lines.

His face strikes me as exceptionally punch-worthy.

He wouldn't call the baby a retard in front of it's daddy, and neither would you.

Wonder why that is?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185158 Nov 17, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>

Violence is for punks, dummies, moral weaklings and cowards.
Take your choice.
Walk a mile in my shoes, Silky Pants.

Some of us just like our fists to feel things crunch.

If you tried it, you might be surprised at the sensation.

Then you want to refine and develop its efficiency and power through better technique.

It's an art form.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185159 Nov 17, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>

Or are you going to be stupid enough to claim that "disbelief" and "lack of belief" have different meanings?
Bwahahahahahah....

Well, yes, I guess I'm stupid enough to claim the two words have different meanings.

Since the two words have different meanings.

Sure is good to have you back, Darwin'sStumpHumper.
Sam

London, KY

#185160 Nov 17, 2013
+++++++GOD NOW APPROVES OF SAME-SEX-MARRIAGE!!!+++++++ God has changed His mind regarding Homosexuality!. God can change His mind on matters if He wants to, there are instances in the Bible where God does just that!. This time is no different. God has certainly been answering the big Gays prayers lately!, with their recent Supreme Court victories and all. God wouldn't answer me, a Straight guy!. You know, I once asked God for a wife, 5 months later, He gave me a wh**e!. I do admit, I did used to blaspheme God a couple years on down before this, but I stopped this. I figured this was the reason God raped me. If God didn't want to give me a wife, He sure as Hell didn't have to give me that rotten wh**e!!!. Because God bestowed this evil upon me, my blaspheming Him returned with a vengence!!!. I lay it on old God now and I don't care if I do go burn forever, HAHAHAHAHA!!!. I blaspheme God real good now. I do it more then I ever did and I am a might proud of that fact, HAHAHAHAHA!!!...GIVE ME ANOTHER WH**E GOD!!!!!!!!!.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#185161 Nov 17, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Walk a mile in my shoes, Silky Pants.
Some of us just like our fists to feel things crunch.
If you tried it, you might be surprised at the sensation.
Then you want to refine and develop its efficiency and power through better technique.
It's an art form.
LOL! Your are not nearly as tough as your words and I am sure you are quite familiar with the wearing of silk panties.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185162 Nov 17, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
I am enjoying Buck in my short foray here. His claims are so idiotic as to be hilarious. At least, when taken in small doses.
Take care. I may hang around for a little while...or I may not.
MY claims are idiotic??

Bwahahahahahaahaaaaa....
__________

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
There is a contradiction unless you use different rules.

Darwin's Stepchild wrote:

No contradiction. The contradiction arises IF you try to use the same rules.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185163 Nov 17, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> They demonstrate he is using a unscientific definition of the word "theory"
and is in fact scientifically he is using the word theory instead of the correct term "hypothesis".
Behe is using the term "theory" in a more strict construction than the other scientists use it frequently in scientific literature.

They didn't demonstrate anything, other than the fact that Behe is much smarter and more honest than they are.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185164 Nov 17, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>

@ Riverside Redneck - this is not a disproof of your god, but it is a sound rebuttal to the argument from complexity for its existence, which is the basis of the intelligent design / irreducible complexity argument.
It is nothing of the sort.

Intelligent Design profers no such argument.

Again, you don't know what you're talking about.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185165 Nov 17, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>It wasn't supposed to sound profound.
Thanks for telling me.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185166 Nov 17, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Buck.
What would you say is your career record, wins and losses, on Topix arguments?
Be honest now.
Winning 99.99%

The only one I can recall losing is when I got mixed up on the writing of the Copper Scrolls found in the Qumran excavations.

It was a couple of years ago. I corrected the record.

That's it.

EdSed

Wishaw, UK

#185167 Nov 17, 2013
It doesn't matter to non-believers like me if I'm called atheist, agnostic &/or secular. Abrahamic gods and these...
godchecker.com
are now discredited, from a rational point of view. To take them seriously one would have to believe a god sent a prophet to Earth or other silly Abrahamic dogma. The Torah, Bible and Quran are just old books and religion is plainly man-made, not god-given.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Disbelief and lack of belief are not "essentially" the same.
You are dead wrong, Dipshit.
"Disbelief" is the presence of something, not the absence of something.
"Lack of belief" is the absence of something.
"Atheism" is the presence of something - belief that no god exists.
Absence of belief is not atheism.
Atheism is an affirmative position of belief.
Atheism is as much a belief as theism.
Religion = superstition
Theology = mythology

When it comes to religion and superstitious beliefs the USA can sometimes appear as backward as anywhere in Waziristan or the Middle East.

Jonny Eve states the "bleedin' obvious"...
http://www.atheismuk.com/2012/03/31/atheism/y...

Clerics should be relics of the past.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#185168 Nov 17, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Behe is using the term "theory" in a more strict construction than the other scientists use it frequently in scientific literature.
They didn't demonstrate anything, other than the fact that Behe is much smarter and more honest than they are.

That's a crick of shat.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#185169 Nov 17, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
"A New Earth" is also outstanding.
Agreed.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185170 Nov 17, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Have you read "The God Delusion"? Dawkins clearly says that he is an atheist in that book. And he defines atheism in the way I have described.
But then, we find that you lie continuously. So why should I pay any attention to what you say?
If you think I'm lying, then I'll let Dawkins refute you himself, Darwin'sDogPecker.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9102...

Interviewer: "Why don't you call yourself an agnostic, then?"

Dawkins: "I do"

Interviewer: "But you are called the world's most famous atheist".

Dawkins: "Not by me".

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#185171 Nov 17, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, clearly you haven't read the book and are speaking opinions that are without basis.
The delusion he is speaking of is the delusion that there is actually evidence of the god of yours. In that sense, yes it is a delusion. The evidence you all claim is in fact nonexistent. And with no evidence it is only logical to conclude that there is very, very likely no god.
Though admittedly, one can not claim "no god" definitively. Not without perfect knowledge on the subject, which no human has.
Excuse me Darwin's stepchild. Over 150 years ago, the missing link was to be the proof man was not created. It's 2013 it's still missing. Page 92 in Darwin's autobiography he admits he does believe in a creator, or God. Even your theory of prove fails to be proven, and if it was the debate would still be alive.

Since: Sep 10

San Juan Capistrano, CA

#185172 Nov 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Who refers to you that way?
Tough litigators.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#185173 Nov 17, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for your advice. I'm familiar with the book, its author, and its thesis. I'm curious as to why you recommend this book for me. Do you think I have trouble living in the moment, or that some aspect of my manner of thought is causing me to suffer? If I'm suffering, I'm grateful to you for bringing that to my attention. I thought I was happy.
Actually, my thought keep me coming into new things on a regular basis.
And would you please define close minded, and explain how it applies to me with a specific example or two?
Anyone that would conclude their faith is proven, is closed minded. There are way too many details we can't answer to introduce anything in regards to the origin of man, earth, souls, and the universe, for anyone to say "I know" or "it is fact"

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#185174 Nov 17, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, Dave, but "dis-" means "not". And yes, there are similarities in meaning between "disavow" and "lack of vow", though modern usage gives disavow a stronger meaning. "lack of vow" would mean neither vowing for or against, while "disavow" would be to vow against.
However, the case with "disbelief" and "lack of belief" are essentially the same. Both mean "to not believe".
You really should think these things through more thoroughly.
<quoted text>
So you are saying that belief is the same as non-belief?
Explain to me, clearly, the semantic difference between "a disbelief in Santa Claus" and "a lack of belief in Santa Claus".
Disbelief is a denial. It is an affirmation that you don't believe in something.

Lack of a belief is no commitment to a certain thinking about something. It is being apathetic and non-committal.

You are on here denying. You are committed to a belief.

No matter what you might like to think.

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
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr macumazahn 14,717
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 4 hr thetruth 1,502
Our world came from nothing? (Jul '14) 4 hr thetruth 1,262
why? 4 hr thetruth 60
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 8 hr Mikko 23,494
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 16 hr woodtick57 2,848
The Consequences of Atheism 19 hr ChristineM 85
More from around the web