Atheism Is Not A Religion!!!

[Quantum Windbag]

I didn't say that. They are just wrong on their definition of atheism.

What makes them wrong? Last time I looked the definition did not include absolute rejection of religious rituals.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist."

Sounds like how atheists really aren't trying to make their religion the one and only accepted religion in the USA

Here's your hat...

Atheism is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. It's a firm belief that the Ego is the most powerful force in the Universe. Further, Islamic Jihadist look like pussies when compared to the fervor with which Fundamentalist Atheists are attempting to eradicate all religions and establish atheism as the Official and Only accepted religion in America

 

[PratchettFan]

I asked you some time back, I am pretty sure, if you considered there being no gods as more likely than there were gods and you said yes. You have indicated on the scale created by Dawkins that you are a 6 (or somewhere between a 5 and a 6). I have asked you to provide one single shred of evidence to support your conclusions and so far all you have done is insist you have no beliefs. Since you have no evidence to support your conclusions, the only thing those conclusions can be is belief. Thus, you have beliefs. Not a lack of belief, not non-belief ... belief.

This contradicts what you just said.

Plenty of evidence.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more. If we deconstruct the term ‘atheism’ we find ‘a – theism’ which means ‘without – theism’ which, in turn, means ‘without – belief in god(s)’. It is, therefore, not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding claims made by theists. Just as it takes no faith to lack belief or remain uncertain concerning any other imaginable claim, it takes none to doubt the existence of a god or gods.

Giving me a definition, which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be inaccurate, which I am to accept without question. This is not evidence, it is dogma. You do not lack belief, so either the definition is wrong or you are not an Atheist. Carla does not lack belief, same situation. In fact, I have yet to meet an Atheist that meets that definition.

BTW, your understanding of how that word works is also wrong.

So your feelings about Islam is Dogma? Your feeling about Jehova or Joseph Smith is Dogma?

Assuming your a christian, is your disbelief in Bigfoot dogma?

I simply don't believe god(s) exist. I think you are either making too much over it or you are trying to bring us down to your level of stupid dogma that you clearly have.

So Buddhism, fully recognized as a religion, is not a religion. Is that what you are saying? Taoism is not a religion. Shintoism is not a religion. Shall I go on?

That's already been addressed.


Many Christians seem to believe that atheism is a religion, but no one with an accurate understanding of both concepts would make such a mistake. Atheism lacks every one of the characteristics of religion. At most, atheism doesn’t explicitly exclude most of them, but the same can be said for almost anything. Thus, it’s not possible to call atheism a religion. It can be part of a religion, but it can’t be a religion by itself. They are completely different categories: atheism is the absence of one particular belief while religion is a complex web of traditions and beliefs.

Atheism is Not a Religion Ideology Belief System Philosophy World View or Anything Similar

I'm not a Christian. It is obviously possible to call Atheism a religion. It has been done many times in the thread alone. Saying it can't be by definition is dogma.

As to what has been addressed, tell Tuatara. He brought it up. If a false argument is being made, then I will point out it is false.

I only gave you the first definition. Do you guys really not understand what a religion is?

2. A particular system of faith and worship:

This is the 2nd definition which would include Buddhism, Taoism & Shintoism.
Atheism still doesn't belong here.

Are you going to just spoon feed definitions to us? If you want to do this by definition this is Websters:

: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

Please note the last item and welcome to the club.

You feel you are being spoon fed definitions so what do you do? You add another definition.
Every activity a person does can be interesting to them, including stamp collecting, watching TV, eating, screwing, coluring in stencils...etc Are you suggesting these all be classified as religions. If you or anyone else says yes then I cannot help your lack of reasoning.

By spoon feed I referred to providing one definition and then another after the first didn't work out for you. So I just did what you did, except gave it to you all at the same time. But that didn't fit what you wanted so now we don't want to use definitions. Not surprising.

Could it fit those, sure. You're the one who wanted to use dictionaries.

 

[PratchettFan]

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist."

Sounds like how atheists really aren't trying to make their religion the one and only accepted religion in the USA

Here's your hat...

Atheism is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. It's a firm belief that the Ego is the most powerful force in the Universe. Further, Islamic Jihadist look like pussies when compared to the fervor with which Fundamentalist Atheists are attempting to eradicate all religions and establish atheism as the Official and Only accepted religion in America

I can only repeat.... that is absurd.

 

[Carla_Danger]

I asked you some time back, I am pretty sure, if you considered there being no gods as more likely than there were gods and you said yes. You have indicated on the scale created by Dawkins that you are a 6 (or somewhere between a 5 and a 6). I have asked you to provide one single shred of evidence to support your conclusions and so far all you have done is insist you have no beliefs. Since you have no evidence to support your conclusions, the only thing those conclusions can be is belief. Thus, you have beliefs. Not a lack of belief, not non-belief ... belief.

This contradicts what you just said.

Plenty of evidence.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more. If we deconstruct the term ‘atheism’ we find ‘a – theism’ which means ‘without – theism’ which, in turn, means ‘without – belief in god(s)’. It is, therefore, not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding claims made by theists. Just as it takes no faith to lack belief or remain uncertain concerning any other imaginable claim, it takes none to doubt the existence of a god or gods.

Giving me a definition, which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be inaccurate, which I am to accept without question. This is not evidence, it is dogma. You do not lack belief, so either the definition is wrong or you are not an Atheist. Carla does not lack belief, same situation. In fact, I have yet to meet an Atheist that meets that definition.

BTW, your understanding of how that word works is also wrong.

So your feelings about Islam is Dogma? Your feeling about Jehova or Joseph Smith is Dogma?

Assuming your a christian, is your disbelief in Bigfoot dogma?

I simply don't believe god(s) exist. I think you are either making too much over it or you are trying to bring us down to your level of stupid dogma that you clearly have.

So Buddhism, fully recognized as a religion, is not a religion. Is that what you are saying? Taoism is not a religion. Shintoism is not a religion. Shall I go on?

That's already been addressed.


Many Christians seem to believe that atheism is a religion, but no one with an accurate understanding of both concepts would make such a mistake. Atheism lacks every one of the characteristics of religion. At most, atheism doesn’t explicitly exclude most of them, but the same can be said for almost anything. Thus, it’s not possible to call atheism a religion. It can be part of a religion, but it can’t be a religion by itself. They are completely different categories: atheism is the absence of one particular belief while religion is a complex web of traditions and beliefs.

Atheism is Not a Religion Ideology Belief System Philosophy World View or Anything Similar

I'm not a Christian. It is obviously possible to call Atheism a religion. It has been done many times in the thread alone. Saying it can't be by definition is dogma.

As to what has been addressed, tell Tuatara. He brought it up. If a false argument is being made, then I will point out it is false.

I only gave you the first definition. Do you guys really not understand what a religion is?

2. A particular system of faith and worship:

This is the 2nd definition which would include Buddhism, Taoism & Shintoism.
Atheism still doesn't belong here.

Are you going to just spoon feed definitions to us? If you want to do this by definition this is Websters:

: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

Please note the last item and welcome to the club.

You feel you are being spoon fed definitions so what do you do? You add another definition.
Every activity a person does can be interesting to them, including stamp collecting, watching TV, eating, screwing, coluring in stencils...etc Are you suggesting these all be classified as religions. If you or anyone else says yes then I cannot help your lack of reasoning.

It depends on how you treat watching TV and screwing. I mean, have you ever yelled out "God?" LOL!

 

[sealybobo]

Religion requires none of those things to be religion. Religion is a human activity and it is not identified by definition but by attributes. Tuatara made a statement about attributes, which was at least on the right track, but the attributes themselves were clearly inaccurate because they failed to include multiple religions as religion. So if you are going to establish attributes as requirements, then they must apply to all religions. If they do not, then the are not requirements. The attributes I have identified are:

Group identity - as indicated religion is social. There must be a sense of "us".
Belief based - the reason for the group is a shared belief
Dogma - the unquestioned acceptance of doctrine

If you wish to dispute any of those I am happy to discuss them. If you want some added, that is open as well but if there is a religion which does not the attribute then it will not stand.

I see you are still holding to the "lack of belief" claim despite your clearly having belief. That makes your particular version of Atheism in line with the three attributes I have indicated.

Personally, I object to the inclusion of dogma as an attribute of religion. Many religions are dogmatic, but some are open to change if their beliefs are proven to be wrong. Many Christians actually accept evolution, and even argue that things defined as sin in the Bible are not, in and of themselves, wrong.

This is why I would use the word doctrine to denote that a religion has teachings, and perhaps even a set of rules, but I am not sure all religions would fit if we used the word rules.

I'm not sure there must be a sense of "us", either. I think that if a person had a set of beliefs about a god or gods, rules by which those deities required the person to live, etc. yet no one else shared those beliefs, it could still qualify as a religion.

I also think there can be a lot of gray area between religion and philosophy.

I don't see religion and belief as the same thing. You have a belief, you are a member of a religion. In fact, you can be a member of a religion and not believe.

What religion do you belong to?

I am a Buddhist.

I'm going to qualify that statement I made, because it is a bit misleading. You can be a member of a religion and not believe, but you have to keep that to yourself. If you announce you don't believe, you won't accepted as a member.

I was that kind of Christian for years.

 

[sealybobo]

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist."

Sounds like how atheists really aren't trying to make their religion the one and only accepted religion in the USA

Atheism would win if all religions went away. But you guys claim that one religion would remain and that religion is atheism.

If the world woke up and stopped believing in imaginary invisible men, that would not be a religion, that would be the end of religions.

If Democrats are the "godless" party, doesn't that infer we are also void of religion?

 

[PratchettFan]

Plenty of evidence.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more. If we deconstruct the term ‘atheism’ we find ‘a – theism’ which means ‘without – theism’ which, in turn, means ‘without – belief in god(s)’. It is, therefore, not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding claims made by theists. Just as it takes no faith to lack belief or remain uncertain concerning any other imaginable claim, it takes none to doubt the existence of a god or gods.

Giving me a definition, which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be inaccurate, which I am to accept without question. This is not evidence, it is dogma. You do not lack belief, so either the definition is wrong or you are not an Atheist. Carla does not lack belief, same situation. In fact, I have yet to meet an Atheist that meets that definition.

BTW, your understanding of how that word works is also wrong.

So your feelings about Islam is Dogma? Your feeling about Jehova or Joseph Smith is Dogma?

Assuming your a christian, is your disbelief in Bigfoot dogma?

I simply don't believe god(s) exist. I think you are either making too much over it or you are trying to bring us down to your level of stupid dogma that you clearly have.

That's already been addressed.


Many Christians seem to believe that atheism is a religion, but no one with an accurate understanding of both concepts would make such a mistake. Atheism lacks every one of the characteristics of religion. At most, atheism doesn’t explicitly exclude most of them, but the same can be said for almost anything. Thus, it’s not possible to call atheism a religion. It can be part of a religion, but it can’t be a religion by itself. They are completely different categories: atheism is the absence of one particular belief while religion is a complex web of traditions and beliefs.

Atheism is Not a Religion Ideology Belief System Philosophy World View or Anything Similar

I'm not a Christian. It is obviously possible to call Atheism a religion. It has been done many times in the thread alone. Saying it can't be by definition is dogma.

As to what has been addressed, tell Tuatara. He brought it up. If a false argument is being made, then I will point out it is false.

I only gave you the first definition. Do you guys really not understand what a religion is?

2. A particular system of faith and worship:

This is the 2nd definition which would include Buddhism, Taoism & Shintoism.
Atheism still doesn't belong here.

Are you going to just spoon feed definitions to us? If you want to do this by definition this is Websters:

: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

Please note the last item and welcome to the club.

You feel you are being spoon fed definitions so what do you do? You add another definition.
Every activity a person does can be interesting to them, including stamp collecting, watching TV, eating, screwing, coluring in stencils...etc Are you suggesting these all be classified as religions. If you or anyone else says yes then I cannot help your lack of reasoning.

It depends on how you treat watching TV and screwing. I mean, have you ever yelled out "God?" LOL!

You have a definite point.

 

[PratchettFan]

Personally, I object to the inclusion of dogma as an attribute of religion. Many religions are dogmatic, but some are open to change if their beliefs are proven to be wrong. Many Christians actually accept evolution, and even argue that things defined as sin in the Bible are not, in and of themselves, wrong.

This is why I would use the word doctrine to denote that a religion has teachings, and perhaps even a set of rules, but I am not sure all religions would fit if we used the word rules.

I'm not sure there must be a sense of "us", either. I think that if a person had a set of beliefs about a god or gods, rules by which those deities required the person to live, etc. yet no one else shared those beliefs, it could still qualify as a religion.

I also think there can be a lot of gray area between religion and philosophy.

I don't see religion and belief as the same thing. You have a belief, you are a member of a religion. In fact, you can be a member of a religion and not believe.

What religion do you belong to?

I am a Buddhist.

I'm going to qualify that statement I made, because it is a bit misleading. You can be a member of a religion and not believe, but you have to keep that to yourself. If you announce you don't believe, you won't accepted as a member.

I was that kind of Christian for years.

Exactly. Religion and belief do not need to go hand in hand. You can engage in religion all your life and never believe, you can believe all your life and never be in a religion.

 

[Montrovant]

I'm not sure there must be a sense of "us", either. I think that if a person had a set of beliefs about a god or gods, rules by which those deities required the person to live, etc. yet no one else shared those beliefs, it could still qualify as a religion.

I also think there can be a lot of gray area between religion and philosophy.

I don't see religion and belief as the same thing. You have a belief, you are a member of a religion. In fact, you can be a member of a religion and not believe.

What religion do you belong to?

I am a Buddhist.

I'm going to qualify that statement I made, because it is a bit misleading. You can be a member of a religion and not believe, but you have to keep that to yourself. If you announce you don't believe, you won't accepted as a member.

I was that kind of Christian for years.

Exactly. Religion and belief do not need to go hand in hand. You can engage in religion all your life and never believe, you can believe all your life and never be in a religion.

Is it fair to say a person is religious based on their actions if they don't actually believe, though? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that person puts on a facade of being religious?

 

[Carla_Danger]

"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist."

Sounds like how atheists really aren't trying to make their religion the one and only accepted religion in the USA

Here's your hat...

Atheism is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. It's a firm belief that the Ego is the most powerful force in the Universe. Further, Islamic Jihadist look like pussies when compared to the fervor with which Fundamentalist Atheists are attempting to eradicate all religions and establish atheism as the Official and Only accepted religion in America

There's no such thing as a fundamentalist atheist.

 

[PratchettFan]

I don't see religion and belief as the same thing. You have a belief, you are a member of a religion. In fact, you can be a member of a religion and not believe.

What religion do you belong to?

I am a Buddhist.

I'm going to qualify that statement I made, because it is a bit misleading. You can be a member of a religion and not believe, but you have to keep that to yourself. If you announce you don't believe, you won't accepted as a member.

I was that kind of Christian for years.

Exactly. Religion and belief do not need to go hand in hand. You can engage in religion all your life and never believe, you can believe all your life and never be in a religion.

Is it fair to say a person is religious based on their actions if they don't actually believe, though? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that person puts on a facade of being religious?

That would not be for me to judge.

 

[sealybobo]

I'm not sure there must be a sense of "us", either. I think that if a person had a set of beliefs about a god or gods, rules by which those deities required the person to live, etc. yet no one else shared those beliefs, it could still qualify as a religion.

I also think there can be a lot of gray area between religion and philosophy.

I don't see religion and belief as the same thing. You have a belief, you are a member of a religion. In fact, you can be a member of a religion and not believe.

What religion do you belong to?

I am a Buddhist.

I'm going to qualify that statement I made, because it is a bit misleading. You can be a member of a religion and not believe, but you have to keep that to yourself. If you announce you don't believe, you won't accepted as a member.

I was that kind of Christian for years.

Exactly. Religion and belief do not need to go hand in hand. You can engage in religion all your life and never believe, you can believe all your life and never be in a religion.

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

See the difference? So it is only after one of you theist tells us about your particular god(s) that we say every single time, "we don't believe in that god". So not believing your version of god is not a belief. Each one of you has your own little spin. We across the board reject every one of your definitions of god. Or we see no proof and remain skeptical.

So basically don't give yourself so much credit. Just because I don't believe you does not make my judgement a "belief". I believe your shit probably stinks more than most people's but I don't pray every day about it.

 

[PratchettFan]

I don't see religion and belief as the same thing. You have a belief, you are a member of a religion. In fact, you can be a member of a religion and not believe.

What religion do you belong to?

I am a Buddhist.

I'm going to qualify that statement I made, because it is a bit misleading. You can be a member of a religion and not believe, but you have to keep that to yourself. If you announce you don't believe, you won't accepted as a member.

I was that kind of Christian for years.

Exactly. Religion and belief do not need to go hand in hand. You can engage in religion all your life and never believe, you can believe all your life and never be in a religion.

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

See the difference? So it is only after one of you theist tells us about your particular god(s) that we say every single time, "we don't believe in that god". So not believing your version of god is not a belief. Each one of you has your own little spin. We across the board reject every one of your definitions of god. Or we see no proof and remain skeptical.

So basically don't give yourself so much credit. Just because I don't believe you does not make my judgement a "belief". I believe your shit probably stinks more than most people's but I don't pray every day about it.

If I grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s) then I would not have an opinion on it one way or the other. That would be a lack of belief. You clearly do hold opinions and you have no evidence to support those opinions, so you do have a belief. Do you see the difference?

Unless you have evidence to support it, your "judgment" can only be belief. It can't be anything else.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

 

[Taz]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

He'd be agnostic, because he'd see no proof either way for or against a god. The only logical position to hold.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

He'd be agnostic, because he'd see no proof either way for or against a god. The only logical position to hold.

I think no......if he grew up on an island and never heard the idea of god(s) and you asked him if he believed in god(s) he would not say he'd seen no proof either way.....he would say "huh?".......

 

[Hollie]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

You're suffering from the debilitating disease of religious extremism. There is nothing ignorant or illogical about rejecting appeals to superstitious fears.

 

[Hollie]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

He'd be agnostic, because he'd see no proof either way for or against a god. The only logical position to hold.

I think no......if he grew up on an island and never heard the idea of god(s) and you asked him if he believed in god(s) he would not say he'd seen no proof either way.....he would say "huh?".......

Exactly. All religious belief is behavior that is a product of cultural and geographic happenstance. Fear based religions such as christianity are learned behaviors.

 

[Tuatara]

I didn't say that. They are just wrong on their definition of atheism.

What makes them wrong? Last time I looked the definition did not include absolute rejection of religious rituals.

The definition also did not include absolute rejection of ear wax sandwiches.