Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

[RiversideRedneck]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm not into dirt, Bud or paper cups.

You're missing out.

What are ya into? Lights, tile & wine glasses?

[Langoliers]

Givemeliberty wrote:

I am especially proud of my volunteer work and donations to the humanist cause. Every year I go to the Philippines and spend thousands on food,water, clothing and medicine for the needy there. After a horrific typhoon and flooding there I was there amongst others 14 hours a day handing out supplies, giving life saving injections and treatments to those who lost their home. I stood and watched as homeless children lined up easily 3 miles deep for a package of crackers sandwich fruit and bottle of water. Unwanted children who were born because the Christian ran theocracy light government makes it nearly impossible for a woman to obtain birth control. My wife is in pre-med classes and wants to practice medicine there free to help those poor children. Here in the states I collect donations for running in marathons with the money going to children's charities and cancer or HIV awareness programs.
I have seen first hand time and time again the damage and heart breaking situations brought on by theists. The same theists who come crawling to us to help fix their mess! Oh but while we are fixing it are we thanked? Nope. We barely get the figurative broom in hand and they are shrieking at us for not believing in their imaginary friend.
Honor? I guess it is a relative term. The dozen of urban low income students I assist for free with their biology and pharmaceutical homework at two different colleges locally would probably say good ole KJ is an alright dude.
Now if coming on topix and giving the theists a little taste of backbone, the theists who try to intimidate and silence non believers because they think we should all be meek and humble and tolerate their abuse and repeated logical fallacies makes me vile, Without reason, Disrespectful, In someone's opinion? So be it, hmmm I will chuckle about how vile And disrespectful I am Friday at U of L for the 6 hours I am assisting the students there as a volunteer. Or perhaps this summer as I am passing out thousands of dollars worth of free medicine and other essentials trying to save some more homeless from dying. Yes I was walking by a group of people there and they were huddled together praying loudly and crying. I looked in and a young girl was on the ground dying of dehydration. Instead of getting her water and rushing her to the hospital they stood there holding hands and praying! I grabbed my cell phone and called for an ambulance and started trying to get her to drink. Slowly she sipped the water as the praying continued. The ambulance came after almost an hour and reluctantly took her to the hospital, the paramedic said she was good as dead and best leave it in the hands of Jesus same thing the crowd thought. She died 18 hours later. They didn't even know her name and couldn't figure it out.
I guess I'll somehow deal with being called disrespectful.
<quoted text>

BAAAAAASHAAAAHAAAAABAAAAAAHAAA AHAAA!

HAAAAAAHAAAAAAA, BAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAA. OH PLEASE LMAO. PLEASE STOP IT!!! LOL

BAAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAA.

"Every year I go to the Philippines and spend thousands on food,water, clothing and medicine for the needy there"

BAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAA. BAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAAAHAAA!

"I am Friday at U of L for the 6 hours I am assisting the students there as a volunteer"

LMAO!! BAAAAAASHAAAAAHAA OMG!! LOL.

"The dozen of urban low income students I assist for free"

BAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAA, please stop it!! LoL

LMAO!!!!!

This coming from liberty! LOL!!

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

So you accept the claims that Mohammad talked with Allah, Buddha achieved Nirvana, and Joseph Smith met angels?

No.

Muhammad copied Moses' writings.

Buddha was a medieval pothead.

Joe smith wanted to gain more followers.

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

We don't consider them history because they're all obviously religious mythology and legend, just like Jesus' miracles.

Since when did you become we?

Prove that we assign the name Homer to the writer of the Iliad and Oddysey?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iliad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odyssey

LMAO! No, prove he even existed.

"We have 2 epic poems. A guy wrote them." is a pretty easy claim to accept.
"A guy was a god, performed miracles, and rose from the dead." is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.

Oh, I see now.

YOU find the stories of Jesus difficult to accept.....
I gotcha.

That doesn't mean they aren't true, that just means YOU don't accept them as true.

[The_Box]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
No.

Those accounts are no less valid than accounts of Jesus' miracles.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

Muhammad copied Moses' writings.

The Koran contains unique writings, and was not written by Muhammad (who was probably illiterate), but by his immediate followers.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

Buddha was a medieval pothead.

Gautama Buddha was born in the 6th century BC. That's not medieval.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

Joe smith wanted to gain more followers.

...and so did early Christians. What's your point?

You haven't been able to provide any reason you accept the Gospels' claims about Jesus, but reject the claims of other religions.

[The_Box]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Since when did you become we?

No one outside of (obviously biased) fundamentalist Christians considers the miracles of Jesus to be historical. They're mythical and legendary.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

LMAO! No, prove he even existed.

Poemsare written by people. The Iliad and Oddysey were likely written by the same person. Historians call this person Homer. Numerous people attributed the works to him.

What exactly is your argument here? That no one wrote the poems? That the person who wrote them was not named Homer?

RiversideRedneck wrote:

Oh, I see now.
YOU find the stories of Jesus difficult to accept.....

Any reasonable person would. You would too, if you were being reasonable, but you're not.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

That doesn't mean they aren't true, that just means YOU don't accept them as true.

There is no reason to believe they are true. There is ample reason to believe they are false. The rational position is to reject the claims.

[KittenKoder]

polymath257 wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes and no. The Romans were quite happy to acknowledge other religions as long as they were willing to also accept the Roman deities. They also had a bias towards 'traditional' religions, meaning those that had existed for long periods of time already.
The Romans generally saw Christianity in the same category as other mystery religions, such as the cult of Isis or the Dionysian mysteries. They usually saw these cults as superstitious and because they were often secretive and exclusive, the Romans saw them as dangerous.
Christianity had the additional problem of being a new religion, although it was often seen as a side-branch of Judaism. When the Jewish wars happened, this caused a lot of bias against the Christians. So the Christians either had to associate with the Jews who were seen as disloyal and the cause of many problems OR they were seen as a new religion and hence a problem that way also.

Ah, thanks for the clarification on the points I failed to be accurate on. I'm not that big on Roman history and only know parts as a precursor to Egyptian history.

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

Poemsare written by people. The Iliad and Oddysey were likely written by the same person. Historians call this person Homer. Numerous people attributed the works to him.
What exactly is your argument here? That no one wrote the poems?

That you cannot prove a historical figure without citing history, same as me.

The evidence of Homer's existence is less substantial than the evidence of Jesus'.

But you doubt Jesus.

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

<quoted text>
Those accounts are no less valid than accounts of Jesus' miracles.
<quoted text>
The Koran contains unique writings, and was not written by Muhammad (who was probably illiterate), but by his immediate followers.
<quoted text>
Gautama Buddha was born in the 6th century BC. That's not medieval.
<quoted text>
...and so did early Christians. What's your point?
You haven't been able to provide any reason you accept the Gospels' claims about Jesus, but reject the claims of other religions.

Aside from Islam being a direct copy of Christianity, Buddha being a stoner & the Mormons were started pretty recently by a lying, greedy man?

[The_Box]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

The evidence of Homer's existence is less substantial than the evidence of Jesus'.
But you doubt Jesus.

I didn't say I doubted Jesus' existence. I said there is no reason to believe the claims of miracles and divinity.

And that is true. The Gospel accounts reek of legend and myth-making.

They weren't written by historians looking to give an account of history. They were written by Christians looking to form a religion.

[The_Box]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Aside from Islam being a direct copy of Christianity, Buddha being a stoner & the Mormons were started pretty recently by a lying, greedy man?

Islam isn't a copy. It's an expansion, just as Christianity is an expansion of Judaism. How do you know Mohammad didn't meet Allah. It was written about.

Buddha was not a stoner. How do you know he didn't achieve Nirvana. It was written about.

Yes, Joseph Smith was a liar at times. But how do you know he didn't meet with angels? It was written about.

Are you ever going to apply the same standards to your religion that you to do others?

[It aint necessarily so]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

The evidence of Homer's existence is less substantial than the evidence of Jesus'

It is possible - highly likely, in fact - that nobody walked on water or turned water into wine. Thus the person alleged to have done these things, called Jesus, may never have lived.

It is not possible that nobody wrote the Iliad and Odyssey.

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

I didn't say I doubted Jesus' existence. I said there is no reason to believe the claims of miracles and divinity.

Well thank yuou for sharing your opinion.

There's more reason to believe than not believe, though...

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

Islam isn't a copy. It's an expansion, just as Christianity is an expansion of Judaism. How do you know Mohammad didn't meet Allah. It was written about.

How do you know he did?

Buddha was not a stoner. How do you know he didn't achieve Nirvana. It was written about.

How do you he wasn't a stoner? He might've reached Nirvana...

Yes, Joseph Smith was a liar at times. But how do you know he didn't meet with angels? It was written about.

He very well could have...

Are you ever going to apply the same standards to your religion that you to do others?

Are you ever gonna apply the same standards to your beliefs that you to do my religion?

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

And that is true. The Gospel accounts reek of legend and myth-making.
They weren't written by historians looking to give an account of history. They were written by Christians looking to form a religion.

That is also your opinion, nothing more.

[The_Box]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Well thank yuou for sharing your opinion.
There's more reason to believe than not believe, though...

What reason? You haven't provided any.

[The_Box]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
How do you know he did?

I don't think he did. There is no evidence to support it.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

How do you he wasn't a stoner? He might've reached Nirvana...

Is there any evidence to suggest he was a stoner? That would go against his teachings.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

He very well could have...

I don't think he did. There is no evidence to support it.

RiversideRedneck wrote:

Are you ever gonna apply the same standards to your beliefs that you to do my religion?

First, what beliefs am I following that I don't apply standards of skepticism to?

Secondly, please answer my question: Are you ever going to apply the same standards to your religion that you to do others?

[The_Box]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
That is also your opinion, nothing more.

It's the opinion of scholars.

Why do you accept the Gospel stories at face value when, if you were told the same story by someone else, you'd call BS?

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

I don't think he did. There is no evidence to support it.

Is there any evidence to suggest he was a stoner? That would go against his teachings.

I don't think he did. There is no evidence to support it.

OK then, all you habe is what you think. Correct.

First, what beliefs am I following that I don't apply standards of skepticism to?

You're implying that you only follow what is fact, when you have no facts (as seen above), just opinions.

Secondly, please answer my question: Are you ever going to apply the same standards to your religion that you to do others?

I always do.

There is multitudes of evidence that Islam is a copycat of Christianity.

What Muhammed had to say is irrelevant to me.

[RiversideRedneck]

The_Box wrote:

It's the opinion of scholars.

OH!.... "scholars"

You make a strong argument, how can I argue with that?

Why do you accept the Gospel stories at face value when, if you were told the same story by someone else, you'd call BS?

Same story? I think you meant if I was told a different story...?