Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256108 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.

Lnc

United States

#200701 Jan 8, 2014
Some news of interest

VATICAN CITY (AP)- Pope Francis has done away with the honorific title "monsignor" for all but a few priests, further evidence of his desire for priests to be simple, humble servants.

The Vatican's Secretary of State sent a letter to its embassies asking them to inform bishops' conferences of the change. From now on, the Vatican reported Tuesday, only diocesan priests who are "chaplains of the Holy Father," can use the honorific, and then only after they turn 65.

Bishops, vicars and archbishops still get to be called "monsignor" and Holy See officials will have the title if their office warrants it.

The Vatican noted that Pope Paul VI reduced the number of ecclesiastic honorifics in 1968 and that Francis' decision "should be taken in this vein, as a further simplification."

Good News for 2014 !!!

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#200702 Jan 8, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly!
Stalin killed Christians because they were Christians.
Just like Hitler killed Christians because they were Christians, and killed Jews because they were Jews.
Glad I could help.
And you would be wrong on both counts, saying it is so is propaganda and propaganda alone.
Dictators kill their opposition , what their flavor of belief is, is of little concern.
With Hitler who himself being Christian , killing Christians was only a matter of killing his opposing Christians. The Nazi party was overwhelmingly Christian people.
Stalin killed Christians because they were enemy's to his socialist party rule.
But you can go on prosthelytizing the inherit propaganda from your religious bigot mentality at your own peril. Only those with something to hide or in utter stupidity will paint history with a false dichotomy.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#200704 Jan 8, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Throckmorton is not just wrong, he's also lying.
I'm not letting this smear go. I'll spend enough time on it to prove Barton is dead solid right.
First, would it be beneficial, while observing this controversy about missionaries to Indians, to know that Throckmorton thinks is is abhorent to send Christian missionaries to Indians?
He does. And would it be logical that he would then persist that a hero, Jefferson, of the "separation of church and state" cabal would not support doing that?
From Throckmorton:
"...the federal government pushed Christianity on Native American tribes until early
in the 20th century. Native children were removed from their families in
elementary school and sent away to boarding schools, sometimes run by church
groups. They were forbidden to speak their language or follow their native
customs. Some recall harsh punishments if the rules were violated. Christian
Native Americans agree that the treatment was demeaning and offensive."
Throckmorton gets portrayed as a conservative evangelical. He is not. He departed his conservative roots and writes for the liberal Huffington Post and the ultra-liberal Salon. He has aligned himself with left-wing causes on gay rights, separation of church and state, and is praised regularly by George Soros-financed groups like "Right Wing Watch".
I will follow with the specifics on how Throckmorton mis-states the record on the Indian issue, and how Barton is right and he is wrong.
Barton is right.

Throckmorton:

"The United States gave money toward a church building and provided a stipend
for a priest to continue work already begun, which included both religious and
nonreligious duties. The Kaskaskia were already Catholic converts. It is
inaccurate to say the federal government sent missionaries to the Kaskaskia
Indians; the federal government provided limited financial support for a limited
time for the support of a priest already working with this group."

Barton:

"Here again Throckmorton views evangelism as a static, already completed activity.
And even though the treaty explicitly provided federal funding for a Catholic “priest to
perform the duties of his office,” Throckmorton holds that this priest was not a missionary
and that my characterization is therefore wrong. But Catholic authorities disagree,
specifically affirming that the Catholic priests who worked with the Kaskaskia definitely
were missionaries;114 and Jefferson signed a treaty that funded the priest in his missionary
and other duties. Throckmorton is simply parsing words in an attempt to make a
distinction where there is no difference. Even if he were correct, however, the example of
the Kaskaskia tribe still supports my main point that Jefferson did not embrace the sort of
strict separation between church and state advocated by organizations such as the ACLU,
AU, FFRF, and others. What would those groups say about legislation that funded a
Catholic priest, even if the priest was prohibited from doing missionary work?"

From Catholic Indian Missions of the United States:

"The first mission among the Illinois was that of the Immaculate Conception, founded by Marquette in 1674 near the present Rockford, Illinois, and known later as the Kaskaskia mission."

Barton is right.



“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200705 Jan 8, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Does that make the Spice Girls, like, apostles or something?
The spice must flow.
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#200706 Jan 8, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Dave, I'm troubled about the amorphous "they" you keep referring to?
Could you identify those theys?
Is any nonbeliever exempt?
Am I a they?
voodoo, they do , you do, voodoo

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#200707 Jan 8, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
Who are the "big boys" you mention?
Looking for new bathhouse companions?
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#200708 Jan 8, 2014
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
The funny part is they don't have enough imagination to create those false personas on their own. They really display a rather low grade of mental abilities. kind of robot like. They just aren't sharp enough to be real human beings.
Are their consciences seared?

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200709 Jan 8, 2014
Buck, responding to ChristineM:
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a bald-faced liar.
Projection, much.
Buck Crick wrote:
Moron.
And yet more projection.
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#200710 Jan 8, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
The spice must flow.
dogpile, tell me that quip about the rules, please, I need a laugh

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200711 Jan 8, 2014
Jay wrote:
<quoted text>
If "faith is a guess" then almost all of what we know is a guess since it requires faith to do science and history.
You, as so many other theists, are conflating different meanings of the word "faith".

"Faith" in the context IANS used means "Belief without evidence", which I believe IANS pointed out.

The word "faith" as you try to use it in the context of science and history means "the evidence show that..."

I can say "I have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow." This is not an UN-evidenced faith but instead is a faith based on inductive logic since the sun has done so every day of my existence (and far far beyond that).

The faith that the sun will come up is a completely different animal from the faith you have in your imaginary friend.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200712 Jan 8, 2014
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> dogpile, tell me that quip about the rules, please, I need a laugh
I see you have devolved into Buck's vileness.

I guess you theists like to stick together.

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#200713 Jan 8, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Do those belief systems look so different? Same god and both the babble and the qoran are selective clones of the tanakh and teach the followers to bow down and worship the abrahamic god. All three abrahamic god books tanakh, OT and quran condone and teach genocide, child murder, slavery, rape, terrorism, torture, misogynism and abuse? I can give you babble verse numbers if you are not conversant with that good book but not well enough up on the tanakh and quran.
There is little difference between them other than personal expression in methods of worship
Another slight difference is that the quran is a little more straightforward about killing non believers aka infidels.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200714 Jan 8, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Throckmorton is not just wrong, he's also lying.
I'm not letting this smear go. I'll spend enough time on it to prove Barton is dead solid right.
First, would it be beneficial, while observing this controversy about missionaries to Indians, to know that Throckmorton thinks is is abhorent to send Christian missionaries to Indians?
He does. And would it be logical that he would then persist that a hero, Jefferson, of the "separation of church and state" cabal would not support doing that?
From Throckmorton:
"...the federal government pushed Christianity on Native American tribes until early
in the 20th century. Native children were removed from their families in
elementary school and sent away to boarding schools, sometimes run by church
groups. They were forbidden to speak their language or follow their native
customs. Some recall harsh punishments if the rules were violated. Christian
Native Americans agree that the treatment was demeaning and offensive."
Throckmorton gets portrayed as a conservative evangelical. He is not. He departed his conservative roots and writes for the liberal Huffington Post and the ultra-liberal Salon. He has aligned himself with left-wing causes on gay rights, separation of church and state, and is praised regularly by George Soros-financed groups like "Right Wing Watch".
I will follow with the specifics on how Throckmorton mis-states the record on the Indian issue, and how Barton is right and he is wrong.
I see Buck is again engaging in ad hominem attacks. Buck thinks Throckmorton is wrong because "Throckmorton thinks is is abhorent to send Christian missionaries to Indians?"

Buck, this is a complete non sequitur as to whether Barton is right or not.

But this IS the sort of non-logic we have come to expect from you.
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#200715 Jan 8, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you have devolved into Buck's vileness.
I guess you theists like to stick together.
don't be so adamant, you cant prove your claims

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200716 Jan 8, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly!
Stalin killed Christians because they were Christians.
Just like Hitler killed Christians because they were Christians, and killed Jews because they were Jews.
Glad I could help.
Just another example of Buck's lack of understanding of history.

Just like his support of Barton is another example.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200717 Jan 8, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Bull shit.
Stalin's goal was to make Russia an atheist state, free from religion.
It had EVERYTHING TO DO WITH ATHEISM.
"The state was committed to the destruction of religion,and destroyed churches, mosques and temples, ridiculed, harassed and executed religious leaders, flooded the schools and media with atheistic teachings, and generally promoted atheism as the truth that society should accept. The total number of Christian victims of Soviet state atheist policies, has been estimated to range between 12-20 millions."
Stalin killed Christians because they were Christians and he was an atheist.
BS, pure and simple.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#200718 Jan 8, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Once you learn Chrsitmath that 1+1+1 = 1
Then you can "prove" that 8 = 1
I will point out that 1+1+1=1 is true if you are using modulo 2 arithmetic.

But I do get your point. Christians start with false assumptions and this leads them to false conclusions.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#200719 Jan 8, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
But I do get your point. Christians start with false assumptions and this leads them to false conclusions.
And the atheist false assumption that there is no God?

That one gets a free pass, right?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#200721 Jan 8, 2014
Bongo wrote:
Come clean, why did you leave the Church, what was such an offence?
It wasn't the church that caused me to leave, at least not the congregations. It was the god. It failed to deliver on its promises, which made it clear that it didn't exist.

After several years of a good faith effort, it was eventually no longer possible to suspend disbelief - something I did for the first several years of my Christian experience. I did that to give the god a chance to reveal itself if it existed, and for the apparent contradictions and errors in the scripture to become sensible with the passage of time. That never happened. There was clearly no holy spirit dwelling in people - no gifts of the spirit. And there was no protection from harm for the faithful, no answering of prayer. In short, there was no evidence of a god.

So, with a fond farewell, the church and I parted ways.

It wasn't until decades later that I came to see the problems with the church, first with the rise of the "moral majority," then with the Bush Jr.years, and finally with my Topix experience, which has been the most revealing.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#200722 Jan 8, 2014
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> Are their consciences seared?
They may lack the circuitry to have a real one.

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 IB DaMann 40,817
News Atheism Destroyed with One Scientific Question 18 min Mikko 1
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 23 min IB DaMann 16,363
A Universe from Nothing? 50 min IB DaMann 95
Who Is Satan The Devil? Is He Real? (Jan '16) 4 hr Eagle 12 28
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 4 hr Eagle 12 20,622
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 5 hr thetruth 3,774
More from around the web