Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258484 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.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#199839 Jan 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I've never been to a church that demeaned anyone, gays and atheists included..
It aint necessarily so wrote:
That's nice. I'm sure that there was a point that went with this.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Yessir, the point was that church's don't hate on gays and atheists as much as you'd like to think.
Did you think you made that point with your comment? I don't. Your narrow experience in a few buildings housing a few congregations is not a rebuttal to a claim about the Christian church.

I made the opposite point here regarding homophobia:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T... ardi

And here regarding atheophobia
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

Can you rebut any of that?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#199840 Jan 6, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Do you think that you could keep up with us? Do you think that you could keep up with me?
With Jeopardy? No. I'd fall asleep within minutes.

Maybe if it was a Star Trek special. Now that'd be fun.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#199841 Jan 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Jesus didn't suggest that the law of Moses would remain forever in effect.
That view would contradict everything we learn from the balance of the New Testament.
Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
Galatians 3:23–25
Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,
Ephesians 2:15
by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
<quoted text>
I accept your concession.
I see you red herring and raise you an ad hominem.
You're stupid.
You insert Paul, in interpretation of what Jesus' said and I'm the one with the red herring?

Jesus said what he said.

Paul said what he said.

The twain do not meet.

It's generally understood when someone resorts to ad personum they are in over the head and want out. Go ahead on then. Doesn't change the facts one jot or tittle.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#199842 Jan 6, 2014
I made the opposite point here regarding homophobia:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#199843 Jan 6, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Riverside Redneck is enjoying a cup of coffee. Perhaps you'd like to join him.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I recently read something that seems relevant here... "That's nice. I'm sure that there was a point that went with this."
No, there was no point. Just random words. Nothing to see here.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#199844 Jan 6, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>

No, there was no point. Just random words. Nothing to see here.
I'm reporting you.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#199845 Jan 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus didn't suggest that the law of Moses would remain forever in effect.
That view would contradict everything we learn from the balance of the New Testament.
Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
Galatians 3:23–25
Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,
Ephesians 2:15
by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
"Galatians 3:23–25
Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,"

You didn't need a rabbi or priest to get to heaven. Jesus cut out the middleman.

I can go on at length about the physics, but won't. I can also go on about the "social" aspects, but won't.

You aren't "trained" to have that belief, but you can be trained toward it. It is going to click or it won't.

The higher force or forces do not owe you an afterlife, but they may appreciate self starters. You are just machinery now. That machinery produced a "soul" that will never "die". But it can be incorporated into a larger existence, or it can be discarded and exist by itself doing nothing. Don't expect to escape "existing" just by dying.

You are being winnowed.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#199846 Jan 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
What are you doing typing in France?
You know Science created France, don't you?
And french fries.
I guess it's better than shouting in English.

In France.

At the top of there lungs.....

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#199847 Jan 6, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Did you think you made that point with your comment? I don't. Your narrow experience in a few buildings housing a few congregations is not a rebuttal to a claim about the Christian church.
I made the opposite point here regarding homophobia:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T... ardi
And here regarding atheophobia
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
Can you rebut any of that?
Yes. I can rebut all of it.

But I don't know which post you're referring to when you link like that. There are 20 posts per page....

Will you specify?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#199848 Jan 6, 2014
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>You insert Paul, in interpretation of what Jesus' said and I'm the one with the red herring?
Jesus said what he said.
Paul said what he said.
The twain do not meet.
It's generally understood when someone resorts to ad personum they are in over the head and want out. Go ahead on then. Doesn't change the facts one jot or tittle.
I like that. Jesus said what he said.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

-Jesus
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#199849 Jan 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I see, I see.
It's on the Internet.
It must be true.
So I guess to you, that means we can't believe anything we read, internet or otherwise. I hope you're including your holy book as well.

And just how do YOU obtain information if not through reading? Is it your contention that everything on the internet is false?

BTW John Wayne Gacy was a roman catholic, care to produce evidence to the contrary?.........Yeah I thought not!!!!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#199850 Jan 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
When one claims moral absolutes, and you claim moral absolutes do not exist, they are both ontological claims - they are about what is.
Maybe I have been unclear. I reject the claim that moral absolutes exist for lack of evidence.
Buck Crick wrote:
The self-contradiction in the assertion "there are no moral absolutes" is that apparently the speaker is asserting this as an objective truth
You entered into a conversation in progress with another poster. I had already told him that I rejected his claim. Sorry for any confusion caused by not inserting the phrase "it is my opinion" every time I repeat myself, especially when it is the third time.

In any event, I have made no claims based in absolute morals. I reject the claim pending the arrival of supporting evidence for it.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#199851 Jan 6, 2014
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh huh. A profound thought someone came up with for you. Lucky you.
Basic physics is the basis for what I related. The real stuff.
Or do you believe eyes are black holes that suck up light? Including blue eyes.
It's all a matter of relative strength and sensitivity in a bottle of energy that just gets shuffled around.
Oh, I know! Real physics is branes, parallel universes, virtual particles, and a few dozen or so couldas, maybes, and wouldas tossed in. And a whole bunch of numbers and symbols.
Real physics is those neat documentaries with the cool music and visuals.
Something the simple minded can grasp. And buy into.
You're sorta cute when you get mad, Dave.

Predictable, too.
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#199852 Jan 6, 2014
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
The ability for mankind to do "science" did not spring up out of nowhere. It is a result of being a chip off the old block that created man that got developed.
I enjoyed my peaceful Christmas and New Year. Thank you for your wishes.
Actually, that chip was from crack being cracked.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#199853 Jan 6, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
I made the opposite point here regarding homophobia:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
This was easier. It's obvious to which post you were referring.

"Another point I wanted to reinforce is that THIS is what the church is teaching huge numbers of people - the teaching that many of you say doesn't take place by a church that many of you say doesn't exist because you don't remember hearing a sermon from a pulpit explicitly instructing you to demean and marginalize gays. I don't know exactly when and where this attitude is taught and learned, but it obviously is. Your post and the icons supporting it contrasted with the posting of the unbelievers is the evidence of that."

Let me take a second look.

"I don't know exactly when and where this attitude is taught and learned, but it obviously is."

Hmmm

Should we discuss what you don't know and how you've figured your answer that 'the church' teaches homophobia?
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#199854 Jan 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong. It means what it means, not what the reader wants it to mean.
In that example it could be that its the readers interpretation given by the Holy Spirit. The power of the Gospel. His sheep he is voice.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#199855 Jan 6, 2014
discocrisco wrote:
Maybe, the Christians got it right on the God thing. What they didn't know that is there is intelligent life right and God manifested himself in another way than us.
And there is millions of our civilizations among this universe and millions of ways God revealed himslf to them
But see it was none of business to know how he did it. It is beyond our feeble little minds. Us humans think we are terminally unique. Guess what. We are not. We are little specks in the infinite, large cosmos.
Disco, I'm not sure what you mean by "terminally unique".

Could you elaborate?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#199856 Jan 6, 2014
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
"Galatians 3:23–25
Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,"
You didn't need a rabbi or priest to get to heaven. Jesus cut out the middleman.
I can go on at length about the physics, but won't. I can also go on about the "social" aspects, but won't.
You aren't "trained" to have that belief, but you can be trained toward it. It is going to click or it won't.
The higher force or forces do not owe you an afterlife, but they may appreciate self starters. You are just machinery now. That machinery produced a "soul" that will never "die". But it can be incorporated into a larger existence, or it can be discarded and exist by itself doing nothing. Don't expect to escape "existing" just by dying.
You are being winnowed.
If I am, I hope she's blonde....
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#199857 Jan 6, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not ask what you rested on your chin while you are sucking your preacher off. You made a deliberately leading statement and then like a good christian, slope your shoulders and cry “not me officer” when it is pointed out that your god is watching you.
You have the hallmarks of a true (and pathetic) christian
Got strawman? You filthy trollip. Youre wiggling like a fish. You swallered my bait hook line and sinker. You projected what "it" was. Dirty gal. And now im not telling you what I was referring to as "it". No wonder youre not a Christian, youre too jizzy. Bobloblah had you pegged.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#199858 Jan 6, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe I have been unclear. I reject the claim that moral absolutes exist for lack of evidence.
<quoted text>
You entered into a conversation in progress with another poster. I had already told him that I rejected his claim. Sorry for any confusion caused by not inserting the phrase "it is my opinion" every time I repeat myself, especially when it is the third time.
In any event, I have made no claims based in absolute morals. I reject the claim pending the arrival of supporting evidence for it.
We both hold a moral value that says it's wrong to rape children.

We apprehend it as an objective moral truth - or at least I do.

What is there to suggest it is not an absolute moral truth? Regardless of what anyone says about that particular moral value, we apprehend it as absolute.

Why would we not? Why would we not think it applies to all possible people, places, and times?

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
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min truth 687,174
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 23 min another viewer 987,155
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 26 min Clearwater 30,719
Popcorn time for movies and shows using VPN 3 hr clayvligon 2
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 7 hr LAWEST100 184,840
Anthony Bragg 8 hr Oic yes 28
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 9 hr Anonymous 286,539
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 23 hr Here For Now 619,788
More from around the web