Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256538 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.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#188816 Dec 1, 2013
River Tam wrote:
Korean restaurant.
I get it.
Don't get bucked.
I'm sayin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Cz6c-XxYSusXX
I was impressed by the quick delivery.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#188817 Dec 1, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Very cute.
But it depends - on whether you want to use the definition of "dog" and "baby", or you want to lie about it - like you just did on "atheist".
If I change the definition of "baby" to "Pope Francis", your statement is incorrect.
See how easy that is?
__________
"Atheism: a + theos, denying god" (Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology).
"Atheism, from the Greek a-theos ("no-god"), is the philosophical position that God doesn't exist. It is distinguished from agnosticism, the argument that it is impossible to know whether God exists or not" (Academic American Encyclopedia).
"Atheism, system of thought developed around the denial of God's existence. Atheism, so defined, first appeared during the Enlightenment, the age of reason" (Random House Encyclopedia).
"Atheism (from the Greek a-, not, and theos, god) is the view that there are no gods. A widely used sense denotes merely not believing in God and is consistent with agnosticism. A stricter sense denotes a belief that there is no God, the use has become the standard one" (Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy).
"Atheism is the doctrine that there is no God. Some atheists support this claim by arguments, but these arguments are usually directed against the Christian concept of God, and are largely irrelevant to other possible gods" (Oxford Companion to Philosophy).
"Atheism is disbelief in God" (Introduction to Philosophy, Perry and Bratman, Oxford University Press).
"Atheism from the Greek a (not) plus theos (god). The doctrine of disbelief in a supreme being" (Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion, William Reese, HumanitiesPress).
"Atheism (Greek, a-[private prefix]+ theos, god) is the view that there is no divine being, no God" (Dictionary of Philosophy, Thomas Mautner, Editor).
"Atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist" (The World Book Encyclopedia).
"Atheism, Greek atheos-Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of God" (Oxford English Dictionary)
"Atheism, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. Atheism is to be distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open whether there is a god or not, professing to find the question unanswerable, for the atheist, the non-existence of god is a certainty" (The New Encyclopedia Britannia).
"According to the most usual definition, an atheist is a person who maintains that there is no god…(rejects eccentric definitions of the word)" (The Encyclopedia of Philosophy).
"Atheism is the doctrine that God does not exist, that belief in the existence of God is a false belief. The word God here refers to a divine being regarded as the independent creator of the world, a being superlatively powerful, wise and good" (Encyclopedia of Religion).
"Atheism (Greek and Roman): Atheism is a dogmatic creed, consisting in the denial of every kind of supernatural power"(Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics-Vol II).
"Atheism denies the existence of deity" (Funk and Wagnall's New Encyclopedia-Vol I).
The atheists say this is straight from the "Christian Dictionary".

All of it, I guess.

LOL

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#188818 Dec 1, 2013
LCNLin wrote:
25 Days till Christmas ! A month in which it is great to pretend be an atheist, if you are too cheap to buy gifts for your family
What a beautiful sentiment, Christian. As a reward, I have one for you: The ice giants stole your holiday.

Merry Xmas.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#188819 Dec 1, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Korean restaurant.
I get it.
Don't get bucked.
I'm sayin
Did I tell you I had Korean food a few weeks ago?

I got some dirt soup.

Pepper didn't help...

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#188820 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
TRANSLATION:
"We atheists get to tell you what a True Christian is and how you're acting all un-Christ-like but you don't get to use a dictionary and tell us what atheist means. It means what we say it means. It means what we want it to mean."
There is no such thing as a Christian, therefore there is no such thing as a "true" Christian.

The Bible means what it means; the problem is you do not like what the Bible says to you so you make up pretend stories so you do not have to deal with the fact that you hate what the Bible tells you to do and when you refuse to obey the Bible in essence you are hating Jesus and giving God the finger.

How many times have you given BibleGod the finger today RR?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#188821 Dec 1, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
The scientific community, you say?
“The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.”
Carl Sagan; "Cosmos"
Tide with Beach wrote:
Carl is talking about the ignorance of evidence, or the absence of it in terms of knowledge of the evidence.
aahhh....

"It says what it says except when it doesn't say what I want it to say."

Sound familiar?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#188822 Dec 1, 2013
Reverend Alan wrote:
So we should trust the Bible in matters of Science?
No. It isn't a science book.

Carrion.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#188823 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Then my experience with God is "having an experience" that is equally proven.
Thanks for your help in clearing that up.
Please help me in clearing up if anyone has ever seen God.

John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time;..."
Exodus 33:20, And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
John 6:46 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father."
1 John 4:12 "No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us."

Versus

Gen. 32:30 "And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
Exod. 33:11 "And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend."
Num. 14:14 "...that thou LORD art seen face to face,..."
Job 42:5 "I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee."
Deut. 34:10 "And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,..."
Deut. 5:4 "The LORD talked with you face to face...."

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#188824 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:

Oh, there was no talking snake.
Reverend Alan wrote:
You were there?
Here we go again....

All snakes are serpents but not all serpents are snakes.
I found this answer online RR.
That's where you find all your answers.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
I don't have a pipe.

Will you share yours?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#188825 Dec 1, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
You are cognizant of the fact that in these days your work environment will determine how much of this physical world you will actually experience?
How do you figure, Dave? The amount of the world you experience and the degree to which you experience it depend on your ability and willingness to explore it physically and intellectually, that is, to do a large variety of things, to visit a lark variety of cultures and terrains, and to understand the things you see and do more fully before, while and after doing them through reading and discussion.

What does that have to do with the work environment?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#188826 Dec 1, 2013
Exodus 33:20, And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

Versus

Gen. 32:30 "And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."

This is confusing RR. How do you trust a book that tells you no one can see God and live and that Jacob say God face to face and his life is preserved.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#188827 Dec 1, 2013
Reverend Alan wrote:
Please help me
No.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#188828 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Stick to what you know.
Another false conception held by many Christians is that the Bible is without contradictions. Few beliefs are more erroneous.

Rom.3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."
1Kgs. 8:46 "...for there is no man that sinneth not,...."
Prov.20:9 "Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?"
Eccl. 7:23 "For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."
Mark 10:18 "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God."
Rom. 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one."
(Also 1 John 1:8 & 10, Rom. 3:12, 5:12, Gal. 3:22)

Versus

Gen. 6:9 "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.
Job 1:8 "...my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" (Job 2:3)
Gen. 7:1 "And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation."
Luke 1:5-6 "In the days of Herod, the king of Judaea,there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abia: andhe had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.(RSV)

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#188829 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
hmm..
So before there was evidence of DNA, that was evidence that it didn't exist?
If there is no evidence of DNA in a vial, there is no DNA in a vial.

I differentiate between ignorance of evidence and absence of evidence. Maybe you would like to do that as well. All the kewl kids are doing it these days.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#188830 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
... I had Korean food a few weeks ago...
I'll alert the media.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#188831 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Oh, there was no talking snake.
<quoted text>
Here we go again....
All snakes are serpents but not all serpents are snakes.
<quoted text>
That's where you find all your answers.
<quoted text>
I don't have a pipe.
Will you share yours?
You make a distinction where none exists. Can you explain why the serpent is Satan? People ask me that all the time and I just tell them it is another church invention. What is your answer?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#188832 Dec 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
All snakes are serpents but not all serpents are snakes.
What about bats, are all bats birds?

Leviticus 11:13-19 (NIV)

13 “‘These are the birds you are to regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture,
14 the red kite, any kind of black kite,
15 any kind of raven,
16 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk,
17 the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl,
18 the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey,
19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

Deuteronomy 14:11-18 (NIV)

11 You may eat any clean bird.
12 But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture,
13 the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon,
14 any kind of raven,
15 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk,
16 the little owl, the great owl, the white owl,
17 the desert owl, the osprey, the cormorant,
18 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188833 Dec 1, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Our question is, "Is there a kitten in the box?"
If there is a kitten in the box, we know what evidence we would expect to see that would support the conclusion that a kitten is in the box.
The absence of that evidence, is the evidence that there is no kitten in the box.
<quoted text>
Yes it is.
<quoted text>
Each instance of the word "evidence" refers to different data.
<quoted text>
Appeal to authority.
Carl is talking about the ignorance of evidence, or the absence of it in terms of knowledge of the evidence.
Even so, the statement should read “The absence of evidence is not necessarily the evidence of absence.”
Absence of expected evidence is always evidence of absence. That's a much more useful thing to remember.
Bull shit.

I am, however, impressed by you being able to determine what Carl Sagan was thinking after he's dead.

Nevertheless, you are wrong, Snide with Bitch.

We are talking about the same set of data. You are trying to limit your classification of evidence to only confirming evidence of the kitten being in the box.

Evidence for the converse also applies to the assertion.

The observation of the box with no kitten inside is not absence of evidence.

It is the presence of evidence.

Your claim of no evidence for "Is there a kitten in the box?" is false, if you observe inside the box.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, because, in your kitten example, the evidence is not absent.

Correcting your statement relative to your case, it says: "The presence of evidence is evidence for absence".

Examples of absence of evidence would be such as...a lid on the box making the contents unobservable; not even observing the box; or looking inside the box and being blind.

Incidentally, mentioning Sagan does not qualify as an appeal to authority, since you prompted it by your thin, arrogant little splash about how "in science" things are done this way or that.

You're over your head here, Snide.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#188835 Dec 1, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
If there is no evidence of DNA in a vial, there is no DNA in a vial.
I differentiate between ignorance of evidence and absence of evidence. Maybe you would like to do that as well. All the kewl kids are doing it these days.
Wrong again, Snide.

"Evidence" is an available body of fact.

If there is DNA in a vial, it is there, whether any evidence exists or not.

IN SCIENCE, that would get you embarrassed, saying there is no DNA because there is no evidence of it.

On here, it just gets you embarrassed by me.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#188836 Dec 1, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
“The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.”- Carl Sagan; "Cosmos" It's only getting uglier for you.
I'm not clear on what Sagan was saying there. He appears to be criticizing the comment here, not supporting it:

"Carl Sagan criticized such "impatience with ambiguity" in cosmologist Martin Rees' maxim, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_abse...

Also,

"Carl Sagan explains in his book The Demon-Haunted World:'Appeal to ignorance: the claim that whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa.(e.g., There is no compelling evidence that UFOs are not visiting the Earth; therefore, UFOs exist, and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Or: There may be seventy kazillion other worlds, but not one is known to have the moral advancement of the Earth, so we're still central to the Universe.) This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.' "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ig...

We would not expect any other evidence that extraterrestrials haven't visited our world apart from the absence of them, which isn't sufficient evidence that they aren't here, as we would expect that they might be able to hide successfully if they were. Perhaps that is what Sagan meant.

Whatever he meant, he was an intelligent enough man to understand that the absence of expected evidence is evidence of absence. Also from Wiki:

"To the extent that C implies E then Not-E must also imply Not-C. In other words, if a cause always leads to an effect, then absence of the expected effect is evidence of absence of the cause. For example, if the causal proposition that If it's raining outside then the streets will be wet is assumed, then it can be assumed that if the streets are not wet then it is not raining outside. The inference that it cannot be raining outside because the streets are not getting wet is exactly as true, or perhaps exactly as untrue, as the original proposition. The statements are logically equivalent."

You're in good company, though Buck. Here's a comical excerpt from the animated show Boondocks mocking Rumsfeld and reprising a famous scene from Pulp Fiction, probably voiced by Samuel L. Jackson:

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 min Aura Mytha 973,534
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 5 min Lbj 106,462
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 6 min Brian_G 281,811
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min kent 653,575
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 9 min Buck Crick 63,260
Encourage Teenage Girls To Have Sex (Oct '11) 1 hr lucky 29
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 1 hr thetruth 9,360
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Steve III 618,740
More from around the web