Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Full story: Webbunny tumblelog

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.
Comments
146,941 - 146,960 of 226,548 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152924 Feb 10, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
True !
Nothing is absolutely true is absolutely true?

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#152925 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all.
Christianity expects atheism.
In fact it even prophecies the modern rise of atheism.
So your premises are totally unsound.
That makes absolutely no sense - which is to be expected from you.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152926 Feb 10, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain.
Gods absolute morality is revealed.

Sin obscures our perception of that morality.

But God can remove that blindfold if we give Him permission to.
blacklagoon

Hyde Park, MA

#152927 Feb 10, 2013
BBSting wrote:
<quoted text>
Although they make a lot of noise, atheists have no proof and/or evidence demonstrating that atheism is accurate and correct. They have nothing. Zero. Game over.
Not only do you have no ideas what constitutes being an Atheist, you have no idea how evidence works and just who is responsible for providing evince. Get back to me when you have fully educated yourself!!!!!!

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#152928 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
Atheism argues that the herd morality is the absolute morality of the current society.
In the dark ages, it was considered by the herd (society), that atheism was heretical and punishable by death.
Therefore, atheism has to condone the persecution of atheism by its own moral standard.
The herd decided atheism was immoral, therefore atheism was immoral...
Absurdity unmatched...
Atheism doesn't "argue" anything. All atheism is is a lack of a belief in a god.

You must be very insecure to need it to mean more so desperately.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152929 Feb 10, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't made any. You make some elaborate and baseless claims that you cannot support, other than with even more elaborate and baseless claims.
What is Pi?
Absolute truth is absolutely true.

Do you deny this?

If you do, explain logically why.

If you do not deny this, then my argument should make sense to you...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152930 Feb 10, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked you a simple question. What is your definition or what definition are you using?
Aren't you the one who went to the kid's dictionary to get a meaning that suited you? While ignoring the adult meanings.
If you cannot stand up to scrutiny, then sit back down and listen.
That seems to be a common definition.

Fire away with our re-definition.:-)

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#152931 Feb 10, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of words, but you said nothing.
Saying that god is self-evident because you are here, is complete bullshit. You cannot support the statement with anything other than blind faith.
Let's get back to the things that we can prove. How do you cure leprosy?
God is self attesting.

All arguments that oppose that are reduced to logical absurdity.

Therefore it is obviously true...

For example, you argue God doesn't exist and deny He has revealed Himself to you, but in the process have to abandon logic and reasoning.

Which is self refuting and proves the self attestation of God.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#152932 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
False premise and a typical atheists mistake on this point.
The obvious truth is:
Every effect has a cause.
Not everything has a cause...
Several problems here:

1) You haven't defined what it means to be caused.
In particular, the typical *definition* of 'A causes B' is that physical laws, working with initial condition A lead to a later condition B. So two things are required for causality: 1) physical laws, 2) time-so earlier and later make sense.

2) You haven't defined what it means to be an effect.
The only possible definition is 'something that is caused', which makes your claim trivial, but useless.

3) Most effects have more than one cause.

4) The correct statement is "everything that has a cause has a physical cause". That is the statement supported by *all* the evidence.

When you correct your statement, you find that the 'first cause' argument for the existence of God fails miserably.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#152933 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So secular atheists are the only people who have a right to be represented in government and education.
And they "own" the government and schools?
Wow, now that is some bigotry right there..
How am I being represented? Oh! You mean that all the evidence excludes your god, so therefore, it represents Atheism.

Well, show us some evidence of your god and we will gladly put him in there.

Do you remember,“cdesign proponentsists”?

All Americans own the public lands and the government. Now would you agree to putting all of the known gods names on our currency? Maybe every sect of every religion should be allowed to have their myths taught as fact in science class?

Your silly attempt at insulting me aside, either you include every sect of every religion or you keep all religions out.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#152934 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Your purpose in "life".
As an atheist, you do not have a "purpose", your life is meaningless in the cold empty aggressive atheistic universe you want to propose.
You aren't listening. The coldness and emptiness of the universe as a whole is irrelevant to my purpose: My purpose is *defined* by me, not by the universe as a whole.
Your life has no meaning.
Not true. It has meaning, as I already stated. But it isn't a cosmic meaning. It isn't something that dramatically affects the universe as a whole. It is *my* purpose and *my* meaning for *my* life.
So you cannot account for the purpose you know you have.
I already did, multiple times. You have ignored my answers.

“Don't be so dichotomous.”

Since: Jan 11

Embrace the grey.

#152935 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
Trying to get some of you guys to actually think about atheism and its inherent contradictions, instead of parroting the atheistic mantra is nigh on impossible it seems...
Are you pretending to be retarded to get attention?

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#152936 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Gods absolute morality is revealed.
Sin obscures our perception of that morality.
But God can remove that blindfold if we give Him permission to.
Your god requires permission for us?!?!?

Your god is man made and therefore can do or be anything that any man wants him to be.
blacklagoon

Hyde Park, MA

#152937 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, your preaching about my preaching contains so many moral imperatives that I would not know which part to say amen to...
I hope you get the point.:-)
Now, to the subject at hand.
I am not making absolute truth claims.
I am pointing you to the Self-existant, eternal God that has created the universe and what He has said about absolute truth.
I am just a messenger, not the writer of the message.
Just to clear that up.
----------
What is to be noted however, is that you have still not accounted for why you have purpose.
It is not a big problem for me, as I know God gave you purpose, so your life makes sense, if you accept that purpose.
You however, just keep claiming you have purpose.
I understand that, but you do not give a reason WHY you should have a purpose as an atheist.
So you point to the knowledge God has given you, deny God and then fail to account for that knowledge, because you cannot.
Which I am pointing out, proves the point.
You deny Gods ownership of your purpose, but then cannot explain why you own that purpose.
You have tried to steal something from God and have been caught like a child with it in your hands.
Now you are being asked:
"Where did you get that from, did you steal it from God."
With which you reply:
"No, it doesn't belong to God, its mine, I made it."
But that creates a problem.
As purpose can only be created by someone who has total control over all things...
Well now you are just a dishonest liar. You mad the claim back on YOUR POST #152820 that "I am making absolute truth claims."

This conversation goes only this far. You have made a positive claim, actually you have made a number of positive claims about an imaginary being. Before we can have any discussion about this being, you are required to present verifiable evidence that this being exists. Be prepared to show scientific evidence and or proof that can be found in reality for this being. You seem to think that by simply making a claim, that it automatically should be accepted a factual.

I now challenge you to prove that our species was not the result of Panspermia, or seeded by a race of highly advance beings. Either way your God becomes completely irrelevant.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#152938 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Logic and causality plainly reveal the need for a First Cause.
All effects need a cause.
Since the definition of 'effect' is 'something that has a cause', your claim is trivial.
Furthermore, the *real* claim is that all effects have a *physical* cause. And this fact destroys your argument.
That is the foundation of all knowledge.
And, once again, this is wrong. Observation and testing is the basis for all knowledge.
You can of course deny that if you want, but it doesn't stop it being true and it further illustrates the absurd lengths you will go to suppress even the most basic self evident truths that you can observe...
Observation, yes. We *observe* that things that have causes have physical causes. You deny this basic fact, thereby stepping outside of logic.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#152939 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Logic and causality plainly reveal the need for a First Cause.
Please define causality. Logic and the correct definition of causality show that there are *many*'first causes' and none of them have the characteristics of a deity because they are ALL physical.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#152940 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolute truth is absolutely true.
Do you deny this?
If you do, explain logically why.
If you do not deny this, then my argument should make sense to you...
That is a philosophical question that cannot be answered, at least not until we know everything.

Much like "Nothing is absolutely true is absolutely true."

I'll stick with science, history and our government.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#152941 Feb 10, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you pretending to be retarded to get attention?
No, I'm not, Tide.

I'm very intelligent.

Even smart enough to white-sheet the mtimber character.

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#152942 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact of the matter is, is that humanity is enslaved in sin.
Due to their rebellion, they continue in that condition.
So the consequence of God having to deal with slavery is not an unexpected situation.
But before you get off on crying out against a moral standard you do not agree with, you first have to explain how you arrived at an absolute moral standard to make a basis for judgement from...
there is no such thing as sin and morality isn't absolute

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#152943 Feb 10, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact you are at war with Him, is plenty enough evidence.
I do not spend my time trying to prove that lizard men disguised as humans exist as it has no credibility.
But that is exactly how we see your claims of the existence of God. The only reason we spend time trying to refute it is that so many people attempt to distort our government and society by their superstitious nonsense. We no longer need to show the non-existence of Zeus or Thor. Yahweh is the same type of myth.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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 It aint necessari... 734,001
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 19 min Johnny 2,547
Judge Mathew J. Gary (Jun '12) 23 min Ghost 27
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 27 min AussieBobby 258,212
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 27 min Sameer 769
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 59 min The Awakener 173,311
Calling Islam 'the religion of peace' was the D... 1 hr yon 8
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Black Thunder 42 600,201
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 2 hr JUDEletePete 118,132
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr truth 539,557
•••
Enter and win $5000

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••