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. Read more

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#91978 Mar 19, 2012
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
1 Timothy 6:12
Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses
1 Timothy 6:19
Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
Matthew 12:11
And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?
Ecclesiastes 2:3
I sought in mine heart to give myself unto wine, yet acquainting mine heart with wisdom; and to lay hold on folly, till I might see what was that good for the sons of men, which they should do under the heaven all the days of their life.
Deuteronomy 22:28
If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
Every example you have given, "lay hold on", is to take hold of by force. Not one suggested a loving embrace. YOU FAILED AGAIN.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#91979 Mar 19, 2012
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I had already been hooked on reading, but I stumbled quite by accident onto his books.
One of my favorite movies is The Fifth Element-- it's a movie you have to see several times, to really get.
And Pratchett, with is love of puns, had penned a book titled "The Fifth Elephant", and it was such a lovely pun, I could not pass it up--
-- it had absolutely nothing at all to do with the movie, of course.
But it was a most excellent read-- so naturally, I asked-- anything else by this author?
And I happily discovered the one I'd just read was the latest in a long-long line of previously-written novels.
I love the fifth element too, watched it ďagainĒ just last week, there seems of be a season of Mila Jovaovitch films on here at the moment, Resident Evil: Apocalypse was on over the weekend.

Iíve read all the discworld series and can recommend all of them, some are merely very good, others are beyond excellent. The films (DVD collections of the TV seriesís), although not particularly accurate to the books are worth watching too if you can get hold of them over the water. Iím sure Amazon will have them

You appear to like the Sam Vimes stories so although not planned that way I suggest reading the earlier ones first, itís quite fascinating to see his life story unfold.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#91980 Mar 19, 2012
Mudz wrote:
Everyone has 'faith' to greater or lesser degrees about everything in the universe. I would say that Atheism as a concept wouldn't require having faith in something, but an absence of faith in God, but in practical terms because God and religion is so prominent, this requires an actual thought out position for the most part.
I do not, and did not, have faith in my teacher, when she told me 1+1=2, she had to show me. That started a series of teachers telling me something and then proving it to me. Once we got into subjects where they could not prove something to me, they had a long history of being right. Let's put that into your belief system. What in your faith is equivalent to 1+1=2? What can we do, time and time again, and come up with the same results, in your faith based belief system?
Mudz wrote:
Just to guess, for most Athiests it's not exactly 'I have no belief in God' which might actually equate to agnosticism, but 'I believe there is no God' in which case it technically does require faith. Or else they would have no position to argue with.
You are trying your best to make me as foolish as you. I do not, believe, that there is not a god. I lack belief due to the lack of proof.
Mudz wrote:
Without subjectivity, or trust, or acceptance, or faith, in varying degrees, we could not have intelligence. Intelligence is entirely rooted in that principle. Without it, you're just a collection of inert atoms.
Again, what is our trust based on? PROOF! For Atheists, Picture a stair case, with million of steps, each step is proof. For faith based believers, there are no step, just a 'start here' platform and an invisible 'heaven' platform. No proof, just blind faith.
Mudz wrote:
Just a small example.
Do you believe there is roughly 7 billion people in the world?
If you answered yes, then unless you have personally seen and accounted for each person with your own two eyes, you're going off faith.
Don't be stupid. We are not going by blind faith that these approximations are exact figures.
Mudz wrote:
Off common knowledge, off census' compiled from other people. It's an example of innate faith, being that it's a 'fact' in that it would be considered insensible to dispute.
Look at an atlas, pick a country you've never been to or seen. Do you believe it still exists anyway?
Approximation, not fact.
Mudz wrote:
Faith. We all have it, we just call it different things, or try to pretend we're not just as human as everyone else. Arguments to the contrary is just being wanky.
You are the one pretending. You want to bring us down to your level. I do not have blind faith in anything. The faith that I have is based on solid evidence. Yours is 100% blind faith.

New Zealand

#91981 Mar 19, 2012
Your logic... is flawed.:)

You might like this one though. Prayer + Prayer = Nothing! Repeat as many times as you like.:P


#91982 Mar 19, 2012

Love it.
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I love the fifth element too,

“Move into the light.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#91983 Mar 19, 2012
Mudz wrote:
<quoted text>
Woops, missed this one, and it's a good point.
You're right, I would definitely say "I don't believe in Santa Claus" as a typical response, just the same as a "I don't believe in God".
But it would also be true for me to say: "I believe Santa Claus doesn't exist." And which is why I believe it's also appropriate description for athiests toward God as well.
I have a definite position and I would back it up, that Santa Claus does not exist, and that he's a fairy tale many teach to their children when they're young. It's a legitimate belief that I hold and I would testify to that in court.:)
Then you understand the concept that if someone answers that they really really do believe in Santa , it is their belief and not yours.
As you do not share their belief of Santa.

New Zealand

#91984 Mar 19, 2012


Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#91985 Mar 19, 2012
Mudz wrote:
Semantics. It's what I'm arguing against. Reasonable trust and faith are emotionally identical. Here's the bible perspective:
Hebrews 11:1 - "Faith is the assured expectation of thing hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld."
And this shows the difference between reasonable trust and faith. Faith believes without evidence. Reasonable trust believes *because* of evidence. With faith, you hope for a situation. With reason, you show that situation actually holds. With faith, you believe in things 'not beheld'. With reason, you require all statements about reality to be based in observation.

These are very, crucially, different things.

New Zealand

#91986 Mar 19, 2012
That's not what the verse actually says. :) It literally has the word 'evident' in there. This would apply for gravity, atomic physics, quantum physics, the big bang, evolution (for evolutionists anyway), and a wonderful array of things. I understand that 'not beheld' would stand out to you though, so it was a reasonable response. :)


Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#91987 Mar 19, 2012
Mudz wrote:
That's not what the verse actually says.:) It literally has the word 'evident' in there. This would apply for gravity, atomic physics, quantum physics, the big bang, evolution (for evolutionists anyway), and a wonderful array of things. I understand that 'not beheld' would stand out to you though, so it was a reasonable response.:)
"he evident demonstration of realities though not beheld"

The only way to have 'evident demonstration of realities' is through observation--beholding, if you prefer. So this phrase is self-contradictory.

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#91988 Mar 19, 2012
What would constitute valid evidence for belief in a creator.

Perhaps Him actually showing up, rather than taking a nap.

But Christians claim he turned up as a Jewish carpenter. Yet these accounts are contradictory and strewn with errors.

And before we get there we need to agree what is a god anyway. Is it Buddha, Allah, Yahweh, the Trinity, one of the other hundreds of gods and goddesses of ancient history?

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#91989 Mar 19, 2012
Mudz, what's your belief, and do you think you'd have this faith if you were born in a different culture. Thanks

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#91990 Mar 19, 2012
Are religious people mentally ill? I mean talking to a stranger in the sky, and believing in crazy made up stories from the Bible.

Should the more evangelical fundie sort be sectioned for the good of humanity?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#91991 Mar 19, 2012
Mudz wrote:
To me though, this also denotes an absence of thought. Meaning that it's never occurred to a person. There's a planet out there in the universe that I've never heard of, so I have formualted no thoughts about it. As soon as it's mentioned to me though, whether fictional or true, I instantly start producing subjective intelligence on the matter.
I'm basically trying to highlight how nothing is truly objective
Again, subjectivity is not a synonym for faith. We recognize that human beings filter their observations through previous experience, biases, errors in judgment, etc. But that doesn't mean that conclusions based upon evidence are faith-based.
Mudz wrote:
You cannot rule out religion on the basis that it is fallible and pure materialism is not.
I'm not. I'm ruling religion out on the basis that it is based upon faith (not merely subjectivity).
Mudz wrote:
Reasonable trust and faith are emotionally identical.
Except that they are not. Faith is belief despite a lack of sufficient evidence. Reasonable trust is based upon sufficient evidence.
Mudz wrote:
This is my argument for the bible. Is it mroe reasonable to conclude that the writers and the archaeological evidence is rational? Or is it a 3500 year old conspiracy?
Then you must equally accept the creation myth writings of the Chinese, the Greeks, the Romans, the Norse, etc.

What can be verified by archaeological evidence is one thing. What cannot is another.
Mudz wrote:
We all think the same way, we all put our trust in facts or beliefs in the same way.
Except that we do not. No amount of scientific discovery will dissuade a creationist that their literal interpretation of their creation myth represents actual history.
Mudz wrote:
In this context, I find that the modern athiestic culture, qualifies as having a faith. The word itself may be distasteful, but the emotional relevance is the same.
I hold no beliefs apart from those based upon reasonable evidence. I have no "faith".
Mudz wrote:
It's not my intention to offend, simply to remove these intellectual barriers so we can deal with each other decently.
Let us know when you get creationists to reject literal interpretations in favor of scientific evidence.

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#91992 Mar 19, 2012
Drew Smith, great point re creation myths of Chinese, Greeks, etc. The Bible thumpers have OCD when it comes to their creation stories. But ignore the fact that different cultures the world over have their own creation myths, equally as valid as their own.

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#91993 Mar 19, 2012
Adam wrote:
Are religious people mentally ill? I mean talking to a stranger in the sky, and believing in crazy made up stories from the Bible.
Should the more evangelical fundie sort be sectioned for the good of humanity?
Mentally ill? Sectioned? You are projecting your own mental condition.

Irrational comment from one who himself is delusional with traits of neuroticism and narcissism.

Let us discuss your Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), which is also displayed in your neurotic writings.

from Wiki:

Callous unconcern for the feelings of others
Gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations.
Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, though having no difficulty in establishing them
Very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence.
Incapacity to experience guilt or to profit from experience, particularly punishment.
Markedly prone to blame others or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behavior that has brought the person into conflict with society
There may be persistent irritability as an associated feature.
The diagnosis includes what may be referred to as amoral, antisocial, asocial, psychopathic, and sociopathic personality (disorder).
The criteria specifically rule out conduct disorders.[6] Dissocial personality disorder criteria differ from those for antisocial and sociopathic personality disorders.[7]
It is a requirement of ICD-10 that a diagnosis of any specific personality disorder also satisfies a set of general personality disorder criteria.


London, UK

#91994 Mar 19, 2012
Eagle 12, im not talking about the run of the mill christians. Just about those fundies who claim to speak for an invisible entity, or hear voices or claim to witness miracles. Wouldnt those ppl be in need of psychiatric help?

London, UK

#91995 Mar 19, 2012
Eagle12, what is the meaning of god to you? To many it is a comfort blanket to project feelings of being wanted and loved. This is all very nice... But is it reality. I chose reality.

London, UK

#91996 Mar 19, 2012
To maintain a religious delusion u need more ppl join than leave. Today religion in the west is in decline. What is the future for it. More of the same. In the internet age it is not possible to maintain the bubble of delusion.

London, UK

#91997 Mar 19, 2012
The way you start a religion is this. You have ur saviour. And u say believe in all this crap and if u dont you go to hell. Of course its nonsense. Why wud any deity speak thru desert nomads, and why wud his ego be so weak to require ppl to submit or burn. Very silly :)

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min River Tam 817,469
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 9 min Aura Mytha 270,053
Poll Are you sick of seeing interracial dating ads? (Jul '08) 41 min poman 42
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Tony17 578,915
Poll Do misspelling and bad grammar bother you? (Dec '07) 1 hr stemaxgizmo 14
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 1 hr dollarsbill 1,961
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 1 hr stemaxgizmo 2,185
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr LAWEST100 609,821
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 3 hr Roberta G 176,202
More from around the web