Atheism Requires Faith Just as Theism Does

[sportsfan7]

Atheism is faith-based. After all, it's impossible to prove a negative (negative being that god(s) doesn't exist).

The logical position which requires no faith is agnosticism.

Before people start asking me things like, "Is it faith-based to believe that unicorns don't exist or tea pots don't orbit the Earth?" In fact, it is. There's no proof that either doesn't exist.

So, the correct and honest answer to whether those exist is that you don't know.

So yeah, I lol a lot at atheists who are as illogical as theists. Only most atheists don't realize they're illogical; most theists do and just admit they believe things based on faith.

[Unpossible]

You're a fuking idiot, I hate these threads. I'm an agnostic atheist. I have no belief in God, there is no reason for me to have one; however, I do not assert knowledge that there is no God.

Fuk off.

[hooked4life]

Don't feed this troll. Though, you can join me in negging him :P.

[_TG_]

1. flamebait atheists
2. atheists fall for bait
3. repeat flamebait tomorrow

[Mr Beer]

[pac8x8]

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

-Sir Isaac Newton



pulled from pulltheplugonatheism

[Mr Beer]

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

-Sir Isaac Newton

Fallacy: Appeal to Authority.

[N4th4n]

atheism does not require faith you dumb kunt.

Not believing is the most rational course of action. ffs you are stupid.

[N4th4n]

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

-Sir Isaac Newton

for a highly intelligent man he sure was a ****ing idiot.

And so are you, for repeating that garbage like it carries any weight.

[AsianAesthetics]

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

-Sir Isaac Newton



pulled from pulltheplugonatheism

"sir, i have no need of that hypothesis"
-Pierre-Simon Laplace

[dakensta]

There are no orbiting teapots.
I know this.
Don't ask me how.

[LunicaAshes]

You're an adult and still don't know the meaning of basic prefixes. Fail.

[ne12o]

I concur.

God pertains to question of the origin on matter, not of our physical universe.

[biggerplz09]

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

-Sir Isaac Newton



pulled from pulltheplugonatheism

Lol umad the period coined as the Newtonian Enlightenment bred naturalism and materialism? Newton is the FATHER of atheism (though he might have run away from his child).




















He's more technically like a great great grand uncle, or something like that. Point being, he's related to it.

[sportsfan7]

There are no orbiting teapots.
I know this.
Don't ask me how.

Faith..

[sportsfan7]

atheism does not require faith you dumb kunt.

Not believing is the most rational course of action. ffs you are stupid.

Well.. then you can prove that god(s) doesn't exist?

[drpurple]

Well.. then you can prove that god(s) doesn't exist?

can you prove that god does? no, you cant. so i will take your lack of evidence for the positive as evidence for the negative. in short, because not a single person who believes in god can prove gods existence, i am left with no option but to believe that he does not.

the moment this is proven otherwise, i will spin on a sixpence, and admit that god is real.

good luck with that.


that aside, it doesnt matter that people cannot prove gods non-existence. that isnt necessary. trying to prove something isnt there is retarded to the nth degree.

you can only test forthings that ARE there. a simple experiment would be "if god exists, may he strike me down with a lightening bolt this second."

[drpurple]

im still here, so thats strike one.

[MiKey4]

There are no orbiting teapots.
I know this.
Don't ask me how.

Faith..

To believe in anything, you need faith.

Some things require more faith than others.

Consider the set of statements:
(1) There is a God
(2) There is no God

To believe in either requires faith, but the amount of faith required is not equal. Given what I personally have observed, (1) requires less faith, so if I am forced to chose, I would chose (1). This might be different or you because your personal observations are different and subjective.

The most rational approach may well be to say "I don't know" and become an agnostic, but then it's a slippery slope into "rational fence-sitting" where you never actually make an assertion about anything. You can end up living life based on ideas such as "I certainly see that chair there, but since it requires faith to believe my eyes are actually working properly, I won't sit on it"

Where you chose to draw the line and take that leap of faith varies from person to person. Hence, we have atheists, agnostics, and theists, none of whom believe that they are acting irrationally.

[jf1]

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

-Sir Isaac Newton

LOL!
it is because our planet is at the right distance that we receive proper heat and light...
that is why this particular planet is able to sustain life.

yes, that happened by chance.

"when a ball lands on a particular blade of grass on the golf course, it would be foolish to exclaim: "Out of all the billions of blades of grass that it could have fallen on, the ball actually fell on this one. How amazingly, miraculously improbable!" The fallacy here, of course, is that the ball had to land somewhere."
r. dawkins

[Penile_Dementia]

Atheism is faith-based. After all, it's impossible to prove a negative (negative being that god(s) doesn't exist).

The logical position which requires no faith is agnosticism.

Before people start asking me things like, "Is it faith-based to believe that unicorns don't exist or tea pots don't orbit the Earth?" In fact, it is. There's no proof that either doesn't exist.

So, the correct and honest answer to whether those exist is that you don't know.

So yeah, I lol a lot at atheists who are as illogical as theists. Only most atheists don't realize they're illogical; most theists do and just admit they believe things based on faith.

Most atheists are agnostic your post is invalid

[XZV]

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."

-Sir Isaac Newton



pulled from pulltheplugonatheism

Born in 1643
Born in 1643
Born in 1643

[Penile_Dementia]

Well.. then you can prove that god(s) doesn't exist?

Nope, and the ability of him to do so or not has absolutely NOTHING to do with his post, the point he made.

[Harbinger]

Well.. then you can prove that god(s) doesn't exist?

I can actually prove god doesn't exist but until somebody proves he does, I'm going to keep it to myself.

[chaoserver]

Since this is a troll thread just gonna copy paste my response to another one:

It's silly to discuss this. Obviously nothing can be completely proved to exist(Matrix status) but when something cannot be proved that does not mean the probability is set to 50-50. For example, every piece of evidence I can gather is telling me this laptop I am typing on exists, therefore the probability of it existing is higher than the odds of it's nonexistence. On the flipside all evidence I can gather is telling me God as modern religion depicts him does not exist and thus there is a greater probability of his nonexistence. Neither of those are something I can prove but something I can verify as personal truth.

A truth is an absolute to you, for example the probability of my laptop not existing is the same probability as God existing, to me. You can replace laptop with any item that you have in front of you tangibly, and God with an invisible unicorn or something else fictitious for the example to fit your beliefs.

[Queequeg]

Atheism is faith-based. After all, it's impossible to prove a negative (negative being that god(s) doesn't exist).

The logical position which requires no faith is agnosticism.

Before people start asking me things like, "Is it faith-based to believe that unicorns don't exist or tea pots don't orbit the Earth?" In fact, it is. There's no proof that either doesn't exist.

So, the correct and honest answer to whether those exist is that you don't know.

So yeah, I lol a lot at atheists who are as illogical as theists. Only most atheists don't realize they're illogical; most theists do and just admit they believe things based on faith.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are simply ignorant rather than a troll

Agnosticism is an epistemological position and not a metaphysical one. You can be both atheist or theist and be gnostic or agnostic. (A)gnosticism refers purely to if you believe god's existence can be proven or not.

If you are not theist then you must be be definition atheist. The only atheism which requires 'faith' is explict strong atheism, which the vast majority of atheists are not.

Wikipedia has some good entires for both topics, take a momement to look up explicit and implicit atheism vs strong and weak atheism vs agnosticism

[Rune]

Atheism is faith-based. After all, it's impossible to prove a negative (negative being that god(s) doesn't exist).

The logical position which requires no faith is agnosticism.

Before people start asking me things like, "Is it faith-based to believe that unicorns don't exist or tea pots don't orbit the Earth?" In fact, it is. There's no proof that either doesn't exist.

So, the correct and honest answer to whether those exist is that you don't know.

So yeah, I lol a lot at atheists who are as illogical as theists. Only most atheists don't realize they're illogical; most theists do and just admit they believe things based on faith.

brb thinking I'm smarter than everybody else due to semantics... which you could at least get right btw.

[Godfrd824]

Fuking teapots, how do they work?

[Scoundrel]

Lol at atheists getting butthurt

[Scoundrel]

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are simply ignorant rather than a troll

Agnosticism is an epistemological position and not a metaphysical one. You can be both atheist or theist and be gnostic or agnostic. (A)gnosticism refers purely to if you believe god's existence can be proven or not.

If you are not theist then you must be be definition atheist. The only atheism which requires 'faith' is explict strong atheism, which the vast majority of atheists are not.

Wikipedia has some good entires for both topics, take a momement to look up explicit and implicit atheism vs strong and weak atheism vs agnosticism

Whle most of you atheists concede the possibility of a God existing, most of you take the firm stance that the abrahamic God does not exist. Most of you derive your conclusions from ****ty translations aswell, I.e. The subject of hell. 'how can a loving God send somebody to burn in hell for wternitjy?'...when infact this cpncept is never mentioned in original texts.