Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258480 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.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#123568 Sep 19, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF was that?
Oddly, it's probably the most coherent thing you've ever posted.
Eli Wallach, in "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly".
Ray

Newark, NJ

#123569 Sep 19, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Say what?
Here is my worldview:
1) I don't have imaginary friends
2) I don't believe in ghosts, zombies, pixies, pegasi, fairies, giants, olympians, gods etc.
3) AIDS, Cancer, Diabetes and Malaria are horrible diseases. Anyone with the ability to create and spread it, OR halt its influence immediately, is EVIL
ok, so most of what you put still doesnt have anything to do with what i put. in any case, i can piece together some semblanbce of an argument from this. in your world view, any being that has the ability to create or spread these deseases is evil. the problem is none of that directly deals with the idea that God is to blame. what i would like is for you to at least elaborate on your position so that i can at least follow your argument logically. i dont want to twist your words or your position.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#123570 Sep 19, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
American education is this bad.
Of all the things the US is adept at wasting, human potential seems to be the favorite.
Hoam skewln maks u stewpid.
Ray

Newark, NJ

#123572 Sep 19, 2012
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, let's look at those --
Prayer -- all evidence says prayer has zero effect.
Beginning of life -- unless you claim to know something no one else in the entire world knows, you really don't know how life began, you're just making stuff up.
i should have been more clear, so i do apologize. i ment the begining of the universe. i believe that modern cosmology greatly supports the idea of a created universe.
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
"Fine tuning" of the universe assumes the entire universe was created just for humans and is nothing more than a modern version of a geocentric argument.
false. the fine tuning of the universe takes all the assorted constants and then looks at if the constants could have been set any different for life. there is no assumption that starts with us being special in some way. we actually start from the evidence of science and then postulate what the best explanation would be.
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Historical Yeshua bin Yosheph has actually never been established. There is no record of Herod killing male children nor of a Passover tradition between the Romans and Hebrew. A star cannot pinpoint a particular house, etc.
strawman. none of the actual things your listing has to do with the recorded historicity of jesus. we have external sources to the bible stating the existance of a man called jesus that roughly mirror the general claim of the jesus of the bible. to deny that jesus existed is to go even further than even bart ehrman's position. even dominick crossan and gert luddeman all say jesus existed.
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Morality as defined by religion is about the worst misogynistic, slave culture morality anyone could possibly imagine. Name 1, just 1, moral precept that you can prove actually originated from your religion.
another strawman. my position is not that morality should just originate from a particular religion, but that there is a moral reality that is objective and that all people regardless of religion aprehend to an extent. if God did create man with the tablet of moral law on his heart, then we should expect for people of all kinds to get at least some of them right. second, when you make such an assertion, i would at least ask that you back up such claims that we are in deed such wretched people.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#123573 Sep 19, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
DF, you are under mistake in understanding something.
"yet defies them?" should read "yet defines them?".
See the difference one little letter can make in understanding something?
Language has its pitfalls.
Yo Dave!

Was responding to a poster claiming his god defies physical laws.

Hope you are doing well, and not going near those saws again!

:)

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#123574 Sep 19, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to study your assumptions a little deeper.
In OOBEs and dreams your consciousness relocates to someplace else than where your body lies. Your "consciousness" is your "life". You are maybe confusing "life" with energizing and activation of a organic machine.
Correction: during OOBEs and dreams it *fells* like you relocate to another place. In fact, you do not. it is *all* your brain making and interpreting images internally. How do we know? Because controlled, double blind studies show that no information other than what is available to the brain is ever found from these experiences.

No, consciousness and life are NOT the same thing. Life is a complex collection of chemical reactions that can be found in a variety of organisms from bacteria to humans. Consciousness is a pattern of processes in the brain that allows for self-awareness (modeling yourself in internal states). Both are physical processes.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#123575 Sep 19, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
True, it got less religious and more "enlightened" in recent decades.
No, it got controlled more by the teacher's unions and education departments, which has been a HUGE step backwards. Also, the amount of knowledge required in today's society of an average person is much more than required 70 years ago, when many had manufacturing jobs. Now, we have an information society.

The single best thing we could do for education in our country is eliminate 'education' degrees. Instead, require math teachers to get an actual mathematics degree, an english teacher to get an actual degree in english, etc.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#123576 Sep 19, 2012
Ray wrote:
<quoted text>
ok, so most of what you put still doesnt have anything to do with what i put. in any case, i can piece together some semblanbce of an argument from this. in your world view, any being that has the ability to create or spread these deseases is evil. the problem is none of that directly deals with the idea that God is to blame. what i would like is for you to at least elaborate on your position so that i can at least follow your argument logically. i dont want to twist your words or your position.
No, you misunderstand.

'Evil' we would only apply to humans or higher beings.

A shark, lion or bear that would kill me to eat me is not 'evil'. The malaria mosquito spreading the disease is not 'evil'.

Was it humans dealing death in this way, we would call them evil; Hitler, Stalin, Pot, Mao, etc.

Thus, if a god/deity did the same, he/she/it would be 'evil'.

Now, I don't believe in a god or deity. I don't need the Bible/Torah/Quran to know that I should not rape, steal and kill. I don't need to be threatened with hell and eternal damnation to be kind to my fellow man.

Thus, in my worldview, disease happens, because the circumstances arise. No god needed. No god to blame.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#123577 Sep 19, 2012
Ray wrote:
<quoted text>
i should have been more clear, so i do apologize. i ment the begining of the universe. i believe that modern cosmology greatly supports the idea of a created universe.
Not really. Either you go by general relativity, where the beginning of the universe is also the beginning of time, which disallows causality for the whole, OR you have to go by some quantum theory of gravity, which tends to lead to a universe extending infinitely before the Big Bang, and hence not 'created'.
false. the fine tuning of the universe takes all the assorted constants and then looks at if the constants could have been set any different for life. there is no assumption that starts with us being special in some way. we actually start from the evidence of science and then postulate what the best explanation would be.
Except that we have no idea what the dynamics of those constants are and even whether they *could* be any different than they are. There may well be mechanisms by which they can change (we do not know this) and those mechanisms may drive them to be what we see today.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#123578 Sep 19, 2012
Eye Heart Jesus wrote:
Atheists:
Please explain using SCIENCE how you are able to think. Can science explain the origin of intelligence?
Also, please explain using SCIENCE how emotions originated.
I suppose I'll be waiting around for a long time....
Find me ONE journal or scientific paper describing how to measure these things, and you have a fair shot at disproving God:)
Intelligence is very much related to memory. When life began to retain information intelligence ensued.

Emotions are the result of memory and learned patterns of behavior,
that are needed for survival.
The more patterns and memory the more complicated emotion becomes.
The association of the information retained in memory triggers the emotional responses of the patterns retained within the brain.


To say it as simply as possibly because emotion is complicated and intelligence is also how we use the retained information.>

Basically both intelligence and emotion are the result of the ability to retain information , the more information retained in memory the more intelligent. Emotion is triggered by responses to positive and negative aspects of the patterns of information retained in memory.
Ray

Newark, NJ

#123579 Sep 19, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
My point is that there is no god. There will be no supernatural solution to the problem of starving and diseased children. Only people-people getting off of their knees-can solve the problems of disease and poverty.
You can make yourself feel better by convincing yourself that god will take care of everything if you can only get everybody to believe as you do, but the fact is, that's BS.
And you know it.
first, i never made the claim that all our problems were going to be fixed with prayer. you didnt adress the point of this being evil and needing a foundation for you to determine if it is evil. and the rest of your point is just a non point. i agree with the fact that we have to get off our butts and help people. i dont feel the way you portrayed me, and i thing that is a huge misconception on your part. you should adress your arguments more thoroughly, because the logic isnt following from any point ive seen.
Ray

Newark, NJ

#123580 Sep 19, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you misunderstand.
'Evil' we would only apply to humans or higher beings.
A shark, lion or bear that would kill me to eat me is not 'evil'. The malaria mosquito spreading the disease is not 'evil'.
Was it humans dealing death in this way, we would call them evil; Hitler, Stalin, Pot, Mao, etc.
Thus, if a god/deity did the same, he/she/it would be 'evil'.
Now, I don't believe in a god or deity. I don't need the Bible/Torah/Quran to know that I should not rape, steal and kill. I don't need to be threatened with hell and eternal damnation to be kind to my fellow man.
Thus, in my worldview, disease happens, because the circumstances arise. No god needed. No god to blame.
then im not understanding the original arguement. you say that there is no God, yet you claim that the moral actions of humans are evil, and if God did the same, he would be doing evil. the problem is that all that youve said are assurtions. the part about hell and damnation is a strawman. im not talking about punishment, im talking about the nature of morality and evil. if ive misunderstood, then i apologize. it could be that both our positions were not well defined.
Ray

Newark, NJ

#123581 Sep 19, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not really. Either you go by general relativity, where the beginning of the universe is also the beginning of time, which disallows causality for the whole, OR you have to go by some quantum theory of gravity, which tends to lead to a universe extending infinitely before the Big Bang, and hence not 'created'.
<quoted text>
causality is still needed in general relativity. to say that the universe doesnt have a cause commits the taxicab fallacy. you cant arbitrarily say that the universe just exists when the laws of nature and logic demand explanation. the quantum theory of gravity also has big issues both scientific and philosophical. for example, the second law of thermodynamics would cause the universe to have ran out of usable energy an infinte time ago. second, you cant have actual infinites in time. you would never get to today.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Except that we have no idea what the dynamics of those constants are and even whether they *could* be any different than they are. There may well be mechanisms by which they can change (we do not know this) and those mechanisms may drive them to be what we see today.
we actually have a pretty good idea about the constants and what the conclusion of both the religious and the skeptic alike is that the constants are finetuned to an amazing accuracy and balance. give me a moment or so and ill give you a bit from some books ive read. in any case, i may have to get back to you tomorrow, im sadly swamped with work.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#123583 Sep 19, 2012
Ray wrote:
<quoted text>
i should have been more clear, so i do apologize. i ment the begining of the universe. i believe that modern cosmology greatly supports the idea of a created universe.
Science is driven by empirical evidence and observation.
True science does not make speculation, to supports the idea of a created universe requires speculation.
Some scientist do speculate but most do not support the idea of a
creator being needed to create the universe.
Because that is pseudoscience being based on conjecture and there is no evidence to support the idea.

The beginning of the universe by human reasoning is drenched in a philosophical argument called the cosmological argument .
It is paradoxical in nature and unsolvable by traditional thinking .
Because it is paradoxical you have the psychological need of the idea of a created universe and a first cause.
Scientists explore reasoning's that eliminate the linear movement of time we experience that can null the conception that there had to be a first cause.


“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#123584 Sep 19, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you misunderstand.
'Evil' we would only apply to humans or higher beings.
A shark, lion or bear that would kill me to eat me is not 'evil'. The malaria mosquito spreading the disease is not 'evil'.
Was it humans dealing death in this way, we would call them evil; Hitler, Stalin, Pot, Mao, etc.
Thus, if a god/deity did the same, he/she/it would be 'evil'.
Now, I don't believe in a god or deity. I don't need the Bible/Torah/Quran to know that I should not rape, steal and kill. I don't need to be threatened with hell and eternal damnation to be kind to my fellow man.
Thus, in my worldview, disease happens, because the circumstances arise. No god needed. No god to blame.

Unless the Lion is the Ghost and the Darkness. lol
lightbeamrider

Fargo, ND

#123585 Sep 19, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
It's ok. You're wrong, but not about me referring to Christianity.
List of a few other deities with Virgin Births:
Krishna was born of the virgin Devaki
Savior Dionysus was born of the virgin Semele.
Buddha too was born of a virgin,
The old Teutonic goddess Hertha was a virgin impregnated by the heavenly Spirit and bore a son.
Scandinavian Frigga was impregnated by the All-Father Odin and bore Balder, the healer and savior of mankind.
from: http://www.entheology.org/pocm/pagan_origins_...
That's not an exhaustive list.
They have a nice quote, though, that you should read:
"Can we morally say: "Ours is history, yours in a lie"?
There's some interesting quotes from early Christians on that page:
(of Jesus:) "He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you believe of Perseus." [Justin Martyr, First Apology, 22]
"We [Christians] are not the only persons who have recourse to miraculous narratives of this kind." [Origin, Against Celsus 1, 37]
Check the dates and you will see they are post Christianity and not virgin births.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#123586 Sep 19, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Correction: during OOBEs and dreams it *fells* like you relocate to another place. In fact, you do not. it is *all* your brain making and interpreting images internally. How do we know? Because controlled, double blind studies show that no information other than what is available to the brain is ever found from these experiences.
No, consciousness and life are NOT the same thing. Life is a complex collection of chemical reactions that can be found in a variety of organisms from bacteria to humans. Consciousness is a pattern of processes in the brain that allows for self-awareness (modeling yourself in internal states). Both are physical processes.
You really need to experience it yourself before making those assumptions.

Why would a consciousness completely dissociate itself from its body and location?

In a hospital you are normally on life support when those things occur. Severe concussions and trauma outside hospitals and the body can do the same, relying on autonomic functions, depending on the injury.

In neither case will you be concerned in taking notes of what you see that a researcher would consider hard facts.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#123588 Sep 19, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
So then you believe there is a god?
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I'm an atheist. All atheists lack theistic belief.
So then you believe there is no god(s).

Either you believe there is a god or you don't. You seem to be afraid to admit that you don't believe that a god exists....

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#123589 Sep 19, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Science is driven by empirical evidence and observation.
And also speculation, assumption & guesswork.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#123590 Sep 19, 2012
Ray wrote:
<quoted text>
thats the fallacy of the assumed question. if i say yes, then you will say then why doesnt he. if i say no, then youll say he isnt real. its like asking have i stopped beating my wife, yes or no.
the real issue is that they do suffer. we want to know why, and it is understandable to ask that question. so what i would say is that God created us as beings with freedom to act in certain ways. the various reasons why children get aids can be listed. think about all the reasons why they could get it. everything from ingnorance of health and hygeine to the more horible sexual immorality the poor children are exposed to. so given this,

the atheist that makes the claim that God shopuld stop the evil that happens to these children have to first establish that the suffering these children go through is morally horrible or evil given atheism, without presupposing a christian worldview. i can expand on this if youd like.
For starters, we argue that childhood AIDS is evidence of the absence of an all-knowing, all-powerful and all-loving god. We do not say that your god should "stop the evil," merely that he would if he existed. But if he doesn't exist, he's off the hook.

Also, there is no need to, "establish that the suffering these children go through is morally horrible." Childhood AIDS is clearly horrible and deeply regrettable. Why don't you know that?

Finally, the fact of childhood AIDS is not a moral issue. It is a health issue.

Of course it is reasonable to "presuppos[e] a christian worldview" when arguing against it.

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
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 14 min Rider on the Storm 4,492
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 27 min Rosesz 695,312
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 28 min Deep Grope 58,817
MESSAGE to Adam Lanza IN HELL 52 min How Do You Know 4
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 2 hr Peter Ross 446,233
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr Tellthetruth 994,016
Looking for someone GOOD to take my online clas... (Sep '13) 4 hr wetakeyourclass 18
More from around the web