Blind atheism vs blind faith

78 posts / 0 new
Last post
Seek3R's picture
"There's a lot of atheists

"There's a lot of atheists who actually study religions and scriptures and I have much respect for such people for that they sincerely study what they doubt, if they don't become obstinate and only study and read what validates the beliefs they already hold.

But statistically most people don't study religions to a significant level, and that should then apply to atheists as well - majority of atheists are blind atheists."

What? "Blind" atheists? It makes sense when you apply "Blind" to believers but not to atheists. In fact, this is so contrary to the truth that it's funny. Atheists are just like scientists, we love to disprove ourselves and love to learn new things. We only believe things which can be proven, practical, and if that's not possible, they should at least make some sense theoretically.

"The same applies to theists. By far the majority of them only formally belong to a religion. Such people if they have no faith can't be said to have blind faith either just as simply the fact that a person doesn't officially belong to a religion doesn't mean they are an atheist."

It depends on what you mean by "no faith". No faith due to hopelessness? No faith due to the presence of contrary evidence that proves religions are bullshit? No faith due to what?

"Majority of those with actual faith never deeply study their own religion or any other one for that matter."

Yes, that's true. They follow what they were taught by the parents.

"Should both be studied to come to a conclusion?"

All one needs to learn is "skepticism" and "rationalism". If you did it accurately, you'll learn many things in the process which may lead you to become an atheist, or agnostic at least.

LogicFTW's picture
@Seek3R

@Seek3R
Whats funny is, most theist when they talk about their god, openly admit they are agnostic, they just don't seem to know it.

Agnostic means "without knowledge of." (and in this context we can add "god" to the preceding sentence.) Theist all the time talk about how god cannot be understood, works in mysterious ways, is outside of human understanding, etc. Just more self contradictions religious folks spout all the time.

Leper's picture
The word agnostic as used

The word agnostic as used generally means a person who highly doubts God exists. So for one to doubt they understand God or doubt they know things for certain about God is different from doubting He exists. And that's why they're called believers.

Cognostic's picture
@Leper: SERIOUSLY!

@Leper: SERIOUSLY! (HEY MODS! REALLY???)

More inane, unfounded, moronic, and certainly not researched bullshit.
AGNOSTIC: a = WITHOUT gnosis / gnostic = knowledge

Agnostic is a claim about KNOWLEDGE. A person who is AGNOSTIC is "WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OF GOD OR GODS." It is a knowledge claim and not a belief claim. Atheism is a belief claim. Most atheists are agnostic atheists. The reason they do not believe in god or gods is for the simple fact that there is no knowledge associated with god or gods. These two words are completely different.

An Agnostic can be a Christian or an Atheist. I may not know there if there is a god buy I can choose to believe anyway. "Thomas, now thoroughly convinced He was the Living Lord responded, "My Lord and my God!" At this, Jesus said, "Because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who believe without seeing." John 20:29

Agnostic: Without knowledge. (Knowledge has little to do with belief for the religious. You prove that every time you open your mouth.) Agnostics do not doubt the existence of god or gods. They have no knowledge of god or gods.

Atheist: Without belief in god. (The absence of belief is generally based on the lack of evidence for knowledge but can be based on complete ignorance. There are primitive tribes that have no gods, for example.)

Sheldon's picture
Leper "The word agnostic as

Leper "The word agnostic as used generally means a person who highly doubts God exists"

That's not even close to being true, Google the word ffs, and you'll not embarrass yourself with such idioticaly errant nonsense.

Agnosticism is the belief that nothing is known, or can be known, about the nature of existence of a deity.

Generally speaking it takes a leap of stupidity to believe a claim you admit a priori you can know nothing about, as all unfalsifiable claims would have to be given equal credence.

I really do hope you're trolling.

Leper's picture
"Agnosticism is the belief

"Agnosticism is the belief that nothing is known, or can be known, about the nature of existence of a deity."

That's another way of putting what I said. Who really cares? An Agnostic is a disbeliever. Usually the arrogant type who says out loud (very loud) "no one can really know anything" and yet disbelieves in his heart and behaviour.

After all an atheist can doubt too. An atheist and an agnostic usually are more or less the same thing - they just stamp different labels on themselves depending on which they feel is superior.

But at the end of the day the human mind is naturally superstitious which leads to that everyone knows and senses a more powerful being, God exists. But in a different way than the believers.

Control yourselves. I know this is gonna trigger you bad. Please, take deep breaths and count to ten, yall. I'd tell you to drink a glass of water, but since it's something the Prophet Muhammad used to do and he talked about how good water is for the body, I fear that may trigger you more. Maybe drink straight from the faucet? He would have disapproved of that.

CyberLN's picture
Leper, you wrote, “I know

Leper, you wrote, “I know this is gonna trigger you bad.“

Is that what you’re after?

Tin-Man's picture
@Leper Re: "Control

@Leper Re: "Control yourselves. I know this is gonna trigger you bad. Please, take deep breaths and count to ten, yall."

I swear, dude, you are slipping more and more. Must be difficult keeping all those different personalities in your head from blending. I have a helpful little tip for you, though. Maybe you should eat a Snickers, drink a Red Bull, and then toss down one of those 5-Hour Energy Shots about twenty minutes before sitting down at the computer. Help kick up those sluggish neurons a notch or two. Because right now, you really SUCK at this whole trolling thing you are trying to do. I mean, could you AT LEAST try to put just a LITTLE effort into it? Geez... How hard could it possibly be to stay in character for just a few posts a day? And just in case you have lost track, the sock you are currently wearing is suppose to be an Islamic FEMALE. (Check your profile.) So wake up already! We have much higher standards for our trolls around here, and lately you have been slacking badly. So get your shit together, dig deep, and show some damn initiative and motivation already. Otherwise, as much as it would pain me to do it, I will be forced to give you a frownie-face sticker on your report card this week. Please don't make me do that. As usual, may The Allah be with you... Always...

(Edit to add.): Please forgive me, but after reading back over this post I realized I made a bit of an "oopsie". When I suggested Leper should eat and drink the prescribed items twenty minutes before sitting down in front of the computer, I made the error of assuming Leper was actually ever away from the computer for that amount of time. My bad, folks. Brain fart on my part. What I should have said was "twenty minutes before logging on to AR." Because no doubt Leper is a truly dedicated - ...ummm... hmmm... - a, uh, truly dedicated individual with dozens of piss bottles and discarded junk-food wrappers piled high around his basement "Command Center". At least that is how I imagine it, anyway... *shrugging shoulders*...

Talyyn's picture
@Leper

@Leper

The word agnostic as used generally means a person who highly doubts God exists. So for one to doubt they understand God or doubt they know things for certain about God is different from doubting He exists. And that's why they're called believers.

VS

"Agnosticism is the belief that nothing is known, or can be known, about the nature of existence of a deity."

Please, just stop, you are dishonest, you really can dispense us with your presence here...

Tin-Man's picture
Hey, Talyyn, in case you

Hey, Talyyn, in case you missed it, darling Leper has been terminated without prejudice. Don't worry, though. No doubt he will return soon wearing a different smelly sock... *chuckle*...

Talyyn's picture
@Tin-Man

@Tin-Man

Oh! I'm always late to the party lol. Pfiou... We will have maybe a week of tranquility.

Cognostic's picture
@Leper RE: "An

@Leper RE: "An Agnostic is a disbeliever."
Are you completely incapable of learning anything new. Is that little hamster wheel in your head simply stuck on the same speed and same direction? YOU ARE WRONG ONCE AGAIN.

An agnostic is a person that knows nothing about god or gods. This position says nothing at all about "belief." Many agnostics are religious. They choose to believe in a personal god or a deist god without actually knowing the attributes of that god. They simply thing something must have started it all and go no further than that. Agnosticism says nothing at all about belief. NOTHING!!! (IT IS NOT WHAT YOU SAID - YOUR COMMENTS ARE NARROW-MINDED THEISTIC UTTERANCES OF BELIEF WITHOUT AN EVIDENCE OR SUBSTANTIATION AT ALL.)

RE: "But at the end of the day the human mind is naturally superstitious." And that is why we have the scientific method and validate utterances and perspectives with facts and evidence. We are no longer Iron Age peasants who respond to the whims of magical thinking. (Well, some of us anyway. Obviously you don't fall into that category.)

What makes you think Muhammad was a prophet? He prophesied nothing. Any prophecy moomoohamat mate was written years after his death. Anyone can be a prophet under those circumstances. At best Muhammad is a made up story who may or may not have actually existed.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Cog

@ Cog

PSSSSSSsssssst...Leper has been terminated. Pass it on....

I must admit I didn't realise that pig nose you wear also included blinkers...so, with a dearth of trolls to laugh at, it is back to the poo flinging contests and the "who can disassemble Tin Man and carry him over the river before re-assembling(mostly) competition".

So are you Captain of Team Primate this time?

Cognostic's picture
@Old Man; AWESOME!

@Old Man; AWESOME! Thanks for the good news. In all honesty. The mods do a great job around here. I really do understand that they have to give everyone a chance. My fuse is obviously shorter than theirs.

Oh fuck! I hate the Tin Man competition. I don't have opposing thumbs. The only thing a torque wrench is good for is bashing open coconuts. Have you ever tried to change a tire with your feet? Same thing.

Tell you what! I will rip the little tin man apart but someone else is gonna have to put him back together.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Cog

@ Cog

Tell you what! I will rip the little tin man apart but someone else is gonna have to put him back together.

This is quite prohibited in the rules viz:4:xii)43a " the subject metal object shall be disassembled using the tools designed for such purpose, e.g Wrenches, Hex Keys etc. Oxy acetylene and brute force are specifically cause for disqualification."
Also I think you will find rule 9:Xvii)101 Sexual predation; is frowned upon by the judges Wearing of masks especially depicting other animals during sexual adventurism is punished by decapitation or circumcision at the neck whichever is cheaper on the insurance schedule.

Maybe you should hire Jo as your second? He has opposable thumbs and is easily led?

Cognostic's picture
@Old man shouts ... "JO?"

@Old man shouts ... "JO?" I'm fucked! Perhaps he can pray away the dumb for the day or get god to fix my frigging thumbs. Without either of those things happening, we don't have a chance in hell.

Tin-Man's picture
@Old Man Re: Competition

@Old Man Re: Competition

Uh, could you do me a favor and remind everybody about the "No Souvenirs" rule? And maybe make extra sure it is strictly enforced this year? I have only so many parts, and some of them are rather necessary. Plus, many are pretty dang expensive for me to replace.

Cognostic's picture
@Tin-Man: "No Souvenirs

@Tin-Man: "No Souvenirs rule? " Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .....

Tin is just pissed because I took a couple of his nuts last year and sold them to an auto shop on E-bay. I heard it took him six months to get replacement nuts because the company kept getting the order wrong and sending him brass balls.

Sheldon's picture
Leper "The word agnostic as

Leper "The word agnostic as used generally means a person who highly doubts God exists"

Sheldon "Agnosticism is the belief that nothing is known, or can be known, about the nature of existence of a deity."

Leper "#1 That's another way of putting what I said. #2 Who really cares? #3 An Agnostic is a disbeliever."

#1 No it isn't, and I just posted the dictionary definition.
#2 Don't be a fucking tool, you brought it up in your post ffs.
#3 No they are fucking not, the word is an assertion about the limits of epistemology, and you are being deliberately moronic just to troll, at least I hope you are.

Leper " Usually the arrogant type who says out loud (very loud) "no one can really know anything" and yet disbelieves in his heart and behaviour."

Oh know you are claiming to know what agnostics believe and think outside of the definition of the word, you're just an angry theist with an axe to grind, and your imbecilic trolling is fooling no one, though the irony of you labelling anyone arrogant is truly fucking hilarious.

Leper "After all an atheist can doubt too. An atheist and an agnostic usually are more or less the same thing - they just stamp different labels on themselves depending on which they feel is superior."

Oh ffs, atheism is a statement that donates a lack of belief, agnosticism is a statement about the limits of epistemology, they are not mutually exclusive, but they are demonstrably not the same fucking thing , except to illiterate retarded theists with an axe to grind. Your command of English is execrable. That last sentence is hilariously stupid errant nonsense.

Leper "But at the end of the day the human mind is naturally superstitious which leads to that everyone knows and senses a more powerful being, God exists. But in a different way than the believers."

The fact humans are naturally superstitious doesn't remotely endorse superstition you clown, quite the opposite, it demonstrates an inherent bias that requires the use of complex objective methods like science and logic in order to avoid the kind of moronic apologetics you and your ilk fall for, and then espouse as true, without being able to demonstrate a shred of objective evidence to support your belief in archaic superstitions about magic sky fairies and flying fucking horses.

Leper "Control yourselves. I know this is gonna trigger you bad. Please, take deep breaths and count to ten, yall. "

Mohammed on a fucking bike, how many times must you be told you all is two fucking words, so if you want to abbreviate it, then is y'all, and your illiteracy as vexing as it is, isn't triggering anything but pity and derision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y%27all

It's becoming increasingly difficult not to point out how dumb your posts are.

Leper " I'd tell you to drink a glass of water, but since it's something the Prophet Muhammad used to do "

I don't attach the same value to the opinion of illiterate, barbaric, paedophile warlords as some people, and I am more than capable of recognising the value of water without recourse to your superstitious guff. Your trolling is as poor as your literacy, and that it must be said is fucking poor.
.

Tin-Man's picture
@Sheldon Re: Leper

@Sheldon Re: Leper

Pssst.... Hey.... Sheldon..... Yoo-hoo.... Sheldon.... Shelllllllll-donnnn...... SHELDON!... Ah, there we go. Uh, hey, dude, in case you missed the memo, our dear Leper troll has been cast into the void of the Netherworld. You can stand down now for a bit. Conserve your energy for the next inevitable bridge dweller that is almost certain to invade the site.

Sheldon's picture
Thank TM, I noticed after I

Thank TM, I noticed after I had posted. Still, it made me feel better. Her trolling was getting more obvious tbh.

Cognostic's picture
@Leper- RE: "The majority

@Leper- RE: "The majority of atheists are blind atheists."

Please cite your source.
40% of Atheists are age 18 to 29
37% of Atheists are age 30 to 49
54% of Atheists are age 50 to 64

68% of all Atheists are men
32% of all Atheists are women

78% of all Atheists are Caucasian
3% of Atheists are Black
7% of Atheists are Asian
10% of Atheists are Latino

30% of Atheists have a household income above $100,00 USD
28% of Atheists have a household income from $50,000 to $99,000 USD
18% of Atheists have a household income from $28,000 to 49,000 USD
24% of Atheists make $30,000 USD or less

26% of Atheists have Graduated High School or less.
31% of Atheists have has some University Classes.
26% of Atheists have graduated College.
16% of Atheists have post graduate degrees.

36% of Atheists are married.
40% of Atheists have never married.

92% of all Atheists do not believe in god or gods.
8% of Atheists still retain some of their woo woo nonsense.

WELL HELL There are all sorts of statistics on atheists but nothing at all about being blind. I would love for you to cite your sources or avoid making inane idiotic posts.

https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/religious-family/athe...

Algebe's picture
@Cognostic: WELL HELL There

@Cognostic: WELL HELL There are all sorts of statistics on atheists

Atheists make up less than 1% of the prison population, and 0% of the foxhole population.

Cognostic's picture
Atheists also try to avoid

Atheists also try to avoid sounding completely fucking stupid less they get called on their bullshit by their fellow atheists. It's unfortunate that there is nothing at all like that in religion.

Leper's picture
Yall wouldn't know the

Yall wouldn't know the difference.

Tin-Man's picture
@Leper Re: "Yall wouldn't

@Leper Re: "Yall wouldn't know the difference."

Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to dedicate this next classic number to our dear Leper. Everybody feel free to sing along to the tune of "Proud Mary (Rollin' on the River)" by that fantastic group known as CCR....

Left a good job in the city
Workin’ for the man every night and day.
Livin’ in the basement of my parents’ home
Plenty of food and it’s all rent-free

Computer keeps on whirrin’…
While kitty cat keeps on purrin’…
Trollin’… trollin’… trollin’ on the A-R…
Trollin’… trollin’… trollin’ on the A-R….

Cognostic's picture
@Leper: I find myself in

@Leper: I find myself in complete agreement with the OP and wonder when she will begin reading and studying her own religious texts. My guess is never and that we will continue hearing the same inane bullshit until she gets board of trolling the site or the mods have had enough and remove her.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Couldn't the same be said for

Jo - Couldn't the same be said for most ancient figures?
I have read that no [contemporary?] historian of Shakespeare mentioned him.

A few seconds of searching leads to dozens of primary sources for Shakespeare.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But this reminds me of a post I made more than 2 years ago:

Nyarlathotep - You know what is really odd? 100% of the Christian's I've talked to in my life that admit there is no contemporary sources for Jesus, immediately retorted that historical figure X also has no contemporary sources; and 100% of those historical figures they suggested (reflexively?) actually do have contemporary sources. Isn't that weird?

Since you seem to have done something kind of similar, would you like to try to explain this phenomenon?

Jo's picture
@ Nyarlathotep

@ Nyarlathotep

It is an attempt, by me at least, to understand why there are no contemporaneous (is that better) references for Jesus.

Here are the first 3 sites that came up on my google search.
They show why this why the question of whether some historical figure existed.

"These abundant historical references leave us with little reasonable doubt that Jesus lived and died."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evi...
https://www.history.com/news/6-historical-figures-who-may-or-may-not-hav...
https://www.rd.com/culture/historical-figures-didnt-exist/

Here is one for Socrates
"All our information about him is second-hand and most of it vigorously disputed"
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socrates/

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Jo

@ Jo

Why are you asking the same damn questions, and worse trying to equate the debatable existence of historical figures with the complete lack of evidence for your jesus figure?

Just because Robin Hood did not exist as anything but wishful thinking/ tales does not make your jesus figure real...in fact your argument of reduction seems to suggest that your Jesus figure as mythicised in the gospels did not exist either, just like the King Arthur of literature, the Homer of legend and all the other 'larger than life ' heroes of legend that have a mass of literature around them all written some hundreds of years later on from the alleged events.

Rather than bringing your jesus figure into focus your links seem to have enabled you to shoot yourself in both feet once again.

Oh and do read and comprehend your first link, even though written by a confirmed and fanatical christian he admits there is no evidence except for much later writing for your HUMAN jesus figure...a bit like "Mort D'Artur" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson.

I am still waiting for your response to my detailed answer to your questions earlier in this thread. .

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.