Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256555 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.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#144956 Dec 22, 2012
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Because religions have a habit of making them mean something completely different from what the rest of the population means by them.
If it weren't for Christianity redefining words and phrases in their Bible, the whole of Christianity would collapse.
Examples:
There is no virgin in Isaiah 7:14
"Son of Man" is Ben'Adam and simply means "good person" not God.
"Messiah" is not a human sacrifice, God nor resurrected from the dead.
"Christ" is from a Greek word for annointed, usually a King.
Lucifer is the same word that Jesus calls himself in Revelation.
etc. & etc.
The morning star is known as "Phosphoros" in Greek, and "Lucifer" in Latin.

Both names means "light bringer" which would be an appropriate name for Jesus.

Do not confuse it with the translation of "Helel ben Shahar" in Isaiah 14:12. The name Lucifer is nowhere to be found in the Hebrew text.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#144957 Dec 22, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
I asked you previously where Krauss made reference to "eternal energy", but I don't see where you answered that question.
<quoted text>
So you're *assuming* that Krauss is making a claim for "eternal energy", but you're not able to point to where he actually makes such a claim?
<quoted text>
How about an answer of "we don't know yet"?
<quoted text>
On the contrary, Krauss has explained how *particles*(the "something") can come into existence from the vacuum state (the "nothing").
So in the end the "nothing" isn't really nothing since the vacuum state isn't really "devoid" or "empty". As I stated in the beginning,its just semantic license. "Nothing" as defined by Krauss bears no resemblence to the definition of nothing as understood by the average person.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#144958 Dec 22, 2012
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
If that's all you can supply is a circular argument, then it speaks more about you than me.
I'll tell you what.
I'll go first. It'll be simple and to the point.
Verb: create
1. Make or cause to be or to become
2. Bring into existence
3. Pursue a creative activity; be engaged in a creative activity
4. Invest with a new title, office, or rank
5. Create by artistic means
6. Create or manufacture a man-made product
WordWeb Pro 6.0
See that first definition? See the second definition?
There you go.
The question you asked:
RiversideRedneck wrote: <quoted text> Name one thing created from non-intelligence
I answered with:
scaritual wrote: <quoted text> Snow, rain, erosion, canyons, waterways, etc...
The answer I gave above fits the first two definitions for "created".
I gave three more examples than what you asked for, too.
Snow isn't created, scar. It's crystalline water ice that fall from clouds.

Rain isn't created, it's precipitated water vapor.

Erosion is a process......

Canyons are formed, not created.

Waterways are navigable bodies of water.....

Try again.

What is created by non-intelligence?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#144959 Dec 22, 2012
Kaitlin the Wolf Witch wrote:
"Atheism requires as much faith as religion"--yet I still haven't seen anyone demonstrate how.
Because you haven't been paying attention.

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#144960 Dec 22, 2012
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently you have the memory of a goldfish:-
" Serah wrote:
<quoted text>I think you might mean Atheists here, G, and not Atheism. I can't see how one can get love and compassion from Atheism, but then again, it is a road I have never walked :)"
In particular "I can't see how one can get love and compassion from Atheism"
In other words you are just another ignorant, bigoted, godbot who thinks the only people to have human emotions are those who believe in a sky daddy.
You are pathetic.
You are pathetic, sorry to say, it is Atheism that I am saying you can't get love and compassion from NOT ATHEISTS!! Can you get that through your stubborn eyes and let it register in your mind????? I even printed out the words from the dictionary to help you but you still missed the point.

“Thank you GOD for JESUS”

Since: Jul 07

And thank you JESUS for caring

#144961 Dec 22, 2012
You can't get love and compassion from Religion either, but you can get love and compassion from Religious people!! Duh.....

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#144962 Dec 22, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
One has to know about Murder Town before Murder Town exists...
One has to BELIEVE that Murder Town exists before they can CHOOSE to go there.

It doesn't matter whether it exists or not.

I chose to go to a McDonalds one time, but when I got "there", there was no McDonalds. The franchise moved and I wasn't aware of it.

I did not choose to go to an empty lot, but that's where I ended up.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#144963 Dec 22, 2012
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
Snow, rain, erosion, canyons, waterways, etc...
He said "one thing".

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#144964 Dec 22, 2012
On the contrary, Krauss has explained how *particles*(the "something") can come into existence from the vacuum state (the "nothing").
Rich wrote:
And this is proveable by the scientific method?
Nothing in science is "provable" by the scientific method. The scientific method does not engage in "proof". "Proof" is the province of mathematics and logic.
Rich wrote:
Krauss assumes the principles of QM are correct.
Where does he say that?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#144965 Dec 22, 2012
Freebird USA wrote:
So in the end the "nothing" isn't really nothing since the vacuum state isn't really "devoid" or "empty".
Devoid or empty of particles? Yes. Devoid or empty of energy? No.
Freebird USA wrote:
"Nothing" as defined by Krauss bears no resemblence to the definition of nothing as understood by the average person.
The "average person" has very little understanding of physics, especially quantum mechanics.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#144966 Dec 22, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Snow isn't created, scar. It's crystalline water ice that fall from clouds.
Rain isn't created, it's precipitated water vapor.
Erosion is a process......
Canyons are formed, not created.
Waterways are navigable bodies of water.....
Try again.
What is created by non-intelligence?
All of those. Remember the first two definitions for "created"?'Created ", is a verb, btw. In case you didn't notice.

Verb: create
1. Make or cause to be or to become
2. Bring into existence

WordWeb Pro 6.0

The definition is clear. Neither of the first two definitions require intelligence. They require no more than what is stated.

It's pretty simple. That you can't understand this, is a failing on your part.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#144967 Dec 22, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
One has to BELIEVE that Murder Town exists before they can CHOOSE to go there.
It doesn't matter whether it exists or not.
I chose to go to a McDonalds one time, but when I got "there", there was no McDonalds. The franchise moved and I wasn't aware of it.
I did not choose to go to an empty lot, but that's where I ended up.
So you think that if you don't know of hell you can't choose to go there?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#144968 Dec 22, 2012
Kaitlin the Wolf Witch wrote:
"Atheism requires as much faith as religion"--yet I still haven't seen anyone demonstrate how.
If one states without reservation that they know for a fact that a diety does not exist. They should be able to prove it,just as the theist is expected to prove the existence. Neither can do so. The theist will readily admit to faith in the dietys existence. With no empirical proof of non-existence the atheists only has faith in his belief he is correct.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#144969 Dec 22, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Devoid or empty of particles? Yes. Devoid or empty of energy? No.
<quoted text>
The "average person" has very little understanding of physics, especially quantum mechanics.
Yet Krauss and Dawkins and Harris write books aimed at the masses. To educate the masses or to enrich themselves? Krauss has had his work represented in the media as answering for once and all the cause.To my knowledge he did not object to that misrepresentation.Again personal motivations coupled with political ideology color everything. Its human nature.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's teapot

#144970 Dec 22, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
He said "one thing".
hahahaaa

"OH"

I really like how he tries to not mention "create", when what he describes is part of the process of non intelligent creation, or the result of non intelligent creation.

The one where he mentions waterways are "navigable bodies of water" is hilarious.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#144971 Dec 22, 2012
Freebird USA wrote:
Yet Krauss and Dawkins and Harris write books aimed at the masses.
And in that book, Krauss explains what he means by "nothing".

So what's your point?
Freebird USA wrote:
Krauss has had his work represented in the media as answering for once and all the cause.
And we all know what a good job popular journalists do in explaining science, don't we?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#144972 Dec 22, 2012
Rich wrote:
<quoted text>And this is proveable by the scientific method? Krauss assumes the principles of QM are correct. So in essensce Krauss and everyone who agrees with his premise merely has "faith" placed in that belief. Back to square one.
QM is one of the most successful theories in physics.

It passes test after test. After test.

Not a whole lot of faith involved.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#144973 Dec 22, 2012
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>hahahaaa
"OH"
I really like how he tries to not mention "create", when what he describes is part of the process of non intelligent creation, or the result of non intelligent creation.
The one where he mentions waterways are "navigable bodies of water" is hilarious.
So funny you didn't rebut...

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#144974 Dec 22, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Sure, but the process must be created.
Ugh.

You're exhausting.

Not really.

Just stupid.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#144975 Dec 22, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
So you think that if you don't know of hell you can't choose to go there?
You can't choose to go to a place if you don't believe that place exists.

Do you still disagree?

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
I posed as black to get into medical school 5 min vijaychokalingam 1
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 9 min bad bob 183,172
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 21 min Regina 653,947
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 21 min Catcher1 63,869
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 25 min Gabriel 973,771
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 29 min Pegasus 281,863
Seeking Females in kent 50 min Villain77 1
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 3 hr Lbj 106,491
More from around the web