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. Full Story

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#177571 Sep 18, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
Science and the Big Bang theory has a problem. And it's about Time science fess up to their inability to over come this obstacle leaving creation as the only viable solution.
1) science dates the universe at 13.7 billion years old.
What time are they using? Time on earth is vastly different then Time on The Sun. Gravity effects time, what of time at the center of our universe?
The GIANT black hole there should have time crawling right along. Or maybe they are using time out in dead space where time really flys.
Ok so some where we believe we have the universe age set at 13.7 billion years.
2) This does bring up another issues. Why is the universe 13.7 billion years old and we see stars 14.8 billion light years away? Weird fact. In fact the further out the Hubble telescope looks it ALWAYS come back with older stars.
So why does science insists on 13.7 billion years as the age of the universe?
One answer....
The "Big Bang" radiation only works with this age.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
3) Now lets look at TIME itself.
Nothing can exist without time
Nothing can happen without time
Nothing can change without time
Time can't pop into existence without time! This is a problem for science and it's Big Bang theory. Science must get past the Time paradox. All of science relies on this.
Science at this point will play the "that's not part of the Big Bang theory" card.
Our answer is so what? Without time there could not be a Big Bang.
Time is proof of creation.
And the Bible is evidence of creation.
When in doubt, the creationist trolls simply spam their cult rubbish.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#177572 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Does not matter how you put it you believe it and you can't prove it.
There's this thing called science that proves we evolved and basic logic proves you have a cult associated mental illness.

You suffer from denialism - you actually know that you;re lying about god to yourself, but you can't bring yourself to admit it.

To deal with it you harass atheists online.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#177573 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>I say the same thing about your respect for the definition of the vocabulary involved. If you want to claim you have scientifically proven fact. The word prove is there. Until you do that you have a belief. By sharing your belief and labeling it with in a group, and a very large group indeed you are partaking in spreading your beliefs. If you are disturbed by Atheism being a religion, there are people you could talk to, to change that. I am not one of them. Would you want me to lie to you, because what I am posting is he truth. gain you vs Richard Dawkins on the topic of atheism. I am sorry, I am taking his word, on atheism requiring faith.
Again...the word faith is not a religious word... There are two definitions... One which is secular and one is a religious.

faith
fāTH/
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
"this restores one's faith in politicians"
synonyms: trust, belief, confidence, conviction; More
antonyms: mistrust
2.
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
synonyms: religion, church, sect, denomination,(religious) persuasion,(religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine More
a system of religious belief.
plural noun: faiths
"the Christian faith"
a strongly held belief or theory.
"the faith that life will expand until it fills the universe"
Origin

More
Middle English: from Old French feid , from Latin fides .

Atheism is not a religion. It does not coincide with the definition at all. This is not opinion this is fact. You arguing the subject makes it no less fact.

re·li·gion
riˈlijən/
noun
1.
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms: faith, belief, worship, creed; More
a particular system of faith and worship.
plural noun: religions
"the world's great religions"
a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.
"consumerism is the new religion"

If you trust something then you have faith in it. However, remember the secular definition of faith. Richard Dawkins is a respected atheist and you are taking his words and twisting them just like you would anyone else's and that's expected, but do not expect me to give you any merit at all.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#177574 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all! Education systems prove this every day. A person could be taught Spanish, while another can't. While that person whom can't could do much better at math. No offence but, how do I know the person I told this to, has the ability to comprehend a book on thought. In this case, I don't think the person I am responding to has a soul, if I am right and pushed the person the wrong way. It just wouldn't go well.
It was a ridiculous and contradictory statement.
Thinking

UK

#177575 Sep 18, 2013
Where's your proof? "Past" Uranus?
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
Science and the Big Bang theory has a problem. And it's about Time science fess up to their inability to over come this obstacle leaving creation as the only viable solution.
1) science dates the universe at 13.7 billion years old.
What time are they using? Time on earth is vastly different then Time on The Sun. Gravity effects time, what of time at the center of our universe?
The GIANT black hole there should have time crawling right along. Or maybe they are using time out in dead space where time really flys.
Ok so some where we believe we have the universe age set at 13.7 billion years.
2) This does bring up another issues. Why is the universe 13.7 billion years old and we see stars 14.8 billion light years away? Weird fact. In fact the further out the Hubble telescope looks it ALWAYS come back with older stars.
So why does science insists on 13.7 billion years as the age of the universe?
One answer....
The "Big Bang" radiation only works with this age.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
3) Now lets look at TIME itself.
Nothing can exist without time
Nothing can happen without time
Nothing can change without time
Time can't pop into existence without time! This is a problem for science and it's Big Bang theory. Science must get past the Time paradox. All of science relies on this.
Science at this point will play the "that's not part of the Big Bang theory" card.
Our answer is so what? Without time there could not be a Big Bang.
Time is proof of creation.
And the Bible is evidence of creation.
blacklagoon

Revere, MA

#177576 Sep 18, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Are you serious? It couldn't be more true. Who did primitive man attribute Thunder and lightning to? Did they know about how Lightning was caused and how thunder was a result of the effects of lighting on the atmosphere? What was the 18TH century belief as to the cause of illness, and the death caused by these diseases. Did they know anything about germ theory? What did our ancestors attribute natural disaster to? Did they know anything about plate tectonics as the cause for earthquakes and tsunamis? What about volcanos? Why did early Hawaiian's throw virgin into the active volcanos if not to please the volcano God Pele.
For every natural disaster, for every unexplained event, for every plague or sickness, God or God's where believed to be the cause.
Has not science taught us what causes earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanos, thunder and lighting? Has not science revealed the cause of most illnesses?
God, demons, Satan, evil spirits, all where blamed for the unexplained, until science came along and revealed the REAL causes.
I dare you to came back and refute any of this, I double dare you. You say this is false, step up to the plate skippy and show me where any of this is false. I don't think you have the balls!!!!!!!

Robert Stevens quote>

It's not a question of me having Balls, I believe you when you say "I have no soul." I do believe you do know yourself as do I. Know myself, and I do have a soul.

Since you have completely changed the subject and refuse to address my post above, I'll take it that you no longer consider it false as you did in a previous post. You're either a complete coward, or simply realize I am right about your God becoming an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance. So thanks for agreeing with me.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#177577 Sep 18, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
When in doubt, the creationist trolls simply spam their cult rubbish.
Yep. Tzarina is on a spamfest in a couple of groups. He has been posting the same cr*p repeatedly for quite a while, even after being soundly refuted. The posts about the Big Bang and the 'edge' of space show a *complete* lack of understanding of the fundamentals of the BB viewpoint. The others are just as bad.

Once again, there was no 'edge' to the BB expansion. The expansion occurs throughout space.
blacklagoon

Revere, MA

#177578 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not a question of me having Balls, I believe you when you say "I have no soul." I do believe you do know yourself as do I. Know myself, and I do have a soul.
I'm sure you do believe you have this "soul" thing. Can you define exactly what a "soul" is? If you are so sure you have one then it should be no problem for you to define what it is. Is it simply a feeling that you have? How do you know that you have one and other do not? What methodology do you use to determine if someone has a "soul" or not?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#177579 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you I didn't watch it all but the Earth and humanity is just too many miracles. I'd go into details but you just see things as you do.
So, IOW, there's just too much you don't understand and don't have any desire to learn about.

That's the religious way.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#177580 Sep 18, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>What methodology do you use to determine if someone has a "soul" or not?
Gingers apparently dont have souls :) according to Eric Cartman. Only joking to any gingers out there.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#177581 Sep 18, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It is less confusing than living in yours, sweetness.
Maybe for you but it makes perfect sense, it is said that the more your brain deteriorates the more childish you get.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#177582 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
That is case by case. A combination of your soul and your inherited DNA.
You still have not provided any evidence for a soul and yet you are still hyping the existence of the soul.

Tel me is this a creationist tactic to present superstition as factual?

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#177583 Sep 18, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
Science and the Big Bang theory has a problem. And it's about Time science fess up to their inability to over come this obstacle leaving creation as the only viable solution.
1) science dates the universe at 13.7 billion years old.
What time are they using? Time on earth is vastly different then Time on The Sun. Gravity effects time, what of time at the center of our universe?
The GIANT black hole there should have time crawling right along. Or maybe they are using time out in dead space where time really flys.
Ok so some where we believe we have the universe age set at 13.7 billion years.
2) This does bring up another issues. Why is the universe 13.7 billion years old and we see stars 14.8 billion light years away? Weird fact. In fact the further out the Hubble telescope looks it ALWAYS come back with older stars.
So why does science insists on 13.7 billion years as the age of the universe?
One answer....
The "Big Bang" radiation only works with this age.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
3) Now lets look at TIME itself.
Nothing can exist without time
Nothing can happen without time
Nothing can change without time
Time can't pop into existence without time! This is a problem for science and it's Big Bang theory. Science must get past the Time paradox. All of science relies on this.
Science at this point will play the "that's not part of the Big Bang theory" card.
Our answer is so what? Without time there could not be a Big Bang.
Time is proof of creation.
And the Bible is evidence of creation.
There is no BB theory problem, where do you get the idea that there is a problem?

1/ Yes wrong the time on earth is slightly different from the time on the sun.- There is no centre of the universe or rather everywhere is the centre of the universe. It is now understood that each galaxy is formed around a giant black hole. Astronomers are currently studying the gas cloud reaction to the entity in the centre of our galaxy.

Everywhere science can show the universe is 13.7 billion years old according to the time base used on earth.

2/ Only weird if you dont understand it, I suggest that you do some research on this topic before making yourself look even more foolish. The universe is around 46 billion light years across. Expansion is independent of the speed of light, space is expanding so nothing has violated the limit imposed by the speed of light

The CMB only needs to work with the age it is.

3/ This is your theory and nothing more, we have been here before and I have explained of the fundamental laws that govern this universe and how they did not exist (certainly as we understand them) at the beginning point of our universe. It seems that you have done the typical fundy and gone round in circles hoping for a different answer. Prior to the resolution of those laws it is unknown if time existed or not therefore how can you make a claim that nothing can exist without time, you make you own paradox without even understanding what you are doing. Oh wait a moment, is this another case of special pleading? Your babble stories dont work with scientific understanding so you need to make BS up to cover your tracks.

Wrong, time is proof of time and the babble is evidence of folk stories and superstitions created by bronze age goat herders and escaped slaves

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#177584 Sep 18, 2013
The Almighty Tzar wrote:
...
Time is proof of creation.
And the Bible is evidence of creation.
http://alittlebitleft.files.wordpress.com/201...

http://atheistpictures.com/wp-content/uploads...

http://www.400monkeys.com/God/

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177586 Sep 18, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
There's this thing called science that proves we evolved and basic logic proves you have a cult associated mental illness.
You suffer from denialism - you actually know that you;re lying about god to yourself, but you can't bring yourself to admit it.
To deal with it you harass atheists online.
I think The Online Atheist is a cult of mental illness.

* Poor Comprehension skills
* Lack of trust
* Over rating the issues of Atheism
* a very strong belief in the last word being correct because it is the final statement.
* repeating questions, even if they were answered.
* finding competition in beliefs
* Believing everyone that disagree with you is really a Christian
* admit being wrong

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177587 Sep 18, 2013
I_see_you wrote:
<quoted text>
Again...the word faith is not a religious word... There are two definitions... One which is secular and one is a religious.
faith
fāTH/
noun
1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
"this restores one's faith in politicians"
synonyms: trust, belief, confidence, conviction; More
antonyms: mistrust
2.
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
synonyms: religion, church, sect, denomination,(religious) persuasion,(religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine More
a system of religious belief.
plural noun: faiths
"the Christian faith"
a strongly held belief or theory.
"the faith that life will expand until it fills the universe"
Origin
More
Middle English: from Old French feid , from Latin fides .
Atheism is not a religion. It does not coincide with the definition at all. This is not opinion this is fact. You arguing the subject makes it no less fact.
re·li·gion
riˈlijən/
noun
1.
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms: faith, belief, worship, creed; More
a particular system of faith and worship.
plural noun: religions
"the world's great religions"
a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.
"consumerism is the new religion"
If you trust something then you have faith in it. However, remember the secular definition of faith. Richard Dawkins is a respected atheist and you are taking his words and twisting them just like you would anyone else's and that's expected, but do not expect me to give you any merit at all.
Very nice but again you can't prove yourself.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177588 Sep 18, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sure you do believe you have this "soul" thing. Can you define exactly what a "soul" is? If you are so sure you have one then it should be no problem for you to define what it is. Is it simply a feeling that you have? How do you know that you have one and other do not? What methodology do you use to determine if someone has a "soul" or not?
It is not that complicated, you do know yourself, I'll cover this more on my next answer to "I_see_you"

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177589 Sep 18, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
Your proof of god's existence is the soul - which also can't be proven to exist?
And, again, inherited DNA is proof of evolution rather than god.
You're really not making very much sense.
I disagree I think DNA is further proof of God and soul.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#177590 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>Very nice but again you can't prove yourself.
I don't have anything to prove.

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Sdertlje, Sweden

#177591 Sep 18, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree I think DNA is further proof of God and soul.
Prove 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
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min June VanDerMark 548,726
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 10 min It aint necessari... 750,779
Ebola Vaccine 13 min andet1987 1
The Lake of Fire 20 min yon 1
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 23 min Dr_Zorderz 261,686
BOSCH Tarabya SERVIS 299.15.34 Bosch TARABYA S... 28 min hangrup 1
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 35 min ChromiuMan 5,469
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 45 min Epiphany2 602,186
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 4 hr top 1,071

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE