I am an atheist (actually, I am more inclined to agnosticism but never mind). I don't hate religion and I do respect religious people, those who aren't crazy zealots I mean. Same kind of militant atheism can be found on the other side too, btw, which I put more or less in the same place as religious fanatism.
What I don't like are generalisations like in the title of this thread.
Topic: Why do Atheists Hate Religion? - page 432. (Read 901341 times)
I believe in corporal punishment of children at the proper time, in the proper way, and for proper reasons.
So you're clearly just of the "nasty bastards using religion to excuse their desire to beat children into submission" school of thought.
Do you know it is possible to raise perfectly well-balanced, psychologically healthy children without inflicting pain on them or abusing them in any way whatsoever, including verbally?
My two children are marvellous little human beings who have not been shaped by being assaulted whenever they make a mistake, because there are ways one can be a responsible parent without abusing the position of power we have and betraying the trust they put in us to care and nurture them in a healthy and functional way.
But, then, you are so staggeringly ignorant and astonishingly dishonest in how you present your position and attempt to defend it, it does not surprise me that you think beating a child is a 'good' thing.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 509
I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!
I am not disproving you but bolded part suggests the god in your heart to have superpowers.
I liked this - "God doesn't have a face or shape but he is in my heart."
I liked this - "God doesn't have a face or shape but he is in my heart."
I believe in Adam and Eve but I am not talking about the superpowers like since God is unhappy with the world, he causes an earthquake, tsunami and so on.
I believe that he is the creator of humans though. I would like to know what atheists believe about Adam and Eve. Don't they believe that there was first one man and woman created on this earth? How were they created according to science?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution
They weren't the first modern humans on the planet, but instead just the two out of thousands of people alive at the time with unbroken male or female lineages that continue on today. - http://livescience.com/38613-genetic-adam-and-eve-uncovered.html
The people researched certainly have false information.
"Those two people didn't know each other," said Melissa Wilson Sayres, a geneticist at the University of California, Berkeley, who was not involved in the study.
There is no God, so your statement means that atheists tinks we are nobody, Sorry try again. and what ignorant people wrote in books means nothing for people that dont think the books are holly
Keep in mind BD has been brainwashed as a child - he cannot look at the proof we provide because his head is in the sand.
His parent's did not love him enough as a child to let him choose his own beliefs. In turn, he will not love his own children enough to let them choose their own beliefs. That is how fairly tales spread - by taking advantage of the innocent and vulnerable.
Thank goodness people are moving away from his religion in droves. I don't think BD has the intelligence to join us, however.
ah I see someone has a differing opinion then you so they must be "wrong" right!
The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.
If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.
But I have you quoted as saying:
Quote
Christianity is not really religion.
Care to explain that hilarious insight?
Christianity is reality. Other religions are not. Even the religion of your own life is not reality, because once you are gone, it will never be remembered by you or brought to your mind again.
This is difficult to conceive of, because we live as though there is no end of tomorrows.
But, you just contradicted yourself again. This was the definition of religion that you recently quoted:
Quote
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience
Can you help me understand what you mean? Oh wait, I have an idea -- pick one definition of religion and stick with it. I don't care if its your own, but pick one and stick with it.
The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.
If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.
But I have you quoted as saying:
Quote
Christianity is not really religion.
Care to explain that hilarious insight?
Christianity is reality. Other religions are not. Even the religion of your own life is not reality, because once you are gone, it will never be remembered by you or brought to your mind again.
This is difficult to conceive of, because we live as though there is no end of tomorrows.
The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.
If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.
But I have you quoted as saying:
Quote
Christianity is not really religion.
Care to explain that hilarious insight?
He attempts to somehow propel Christianity to an imaginary status above that of religion, as he deems Atheism a religion(Which it is not), and likely doesn't want his own beliefs to be in the same "league" as that of an Atheists.
Either way, everything BADecker has said here is wrong. I'm still chewing on the prospect of there being a god based on what you previously said, but reading BADecker's posts is making me realize why so many are Atheists. His posts are so nonsensical that it has a comedic effect.
The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.
If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.
But I have you quoted as saying:
Quote
Christianity is not really religion.
Care to explain that hilarious insight?
Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.
Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.
Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:
Quote
religion
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?
Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:
Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.
As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.
I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?
There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.
Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.
That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion
At best, atheism is a philosophy.
Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.
If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.
Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.
You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.
None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.
Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.
There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.
Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.
It has to do with the extent or devotion.
Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.
Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit. Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.
Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?
By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts. From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.
Here's a sneak peak:
Quote
"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
"
""Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."
"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."
"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."
"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."
Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!
All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.
I don't need to argue or debate against you. You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements. You lose to yourself.
The way you live your life IS your religion. If you make a change to your lifestyle once in a while, and don't do it very often, the contents of the change may possibly not be part of your religion.
Because of this, everything we do in life as part of our lifestyle is our religion.
Is atheism part of our personal religion? It might not be if we barely ever consider it, even though we believe it in a general way. The dividing line between religion and not religion is unclear.
Hey, when you care to start using the same language everyone else is using, come back and try again, okay? I never know what you say because it will never remain the same.
Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.
Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.
Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:
Quote
religion
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?
Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:
Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.
As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.
I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?
There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.
Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.
That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion
At best, atheism is a philosophy.
Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.
If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.
Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.
You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.
None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.
Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.
There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.
Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.
It has to do with the extent or devotion.
Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.
Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit. Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.
Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?
By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts. From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.
Here's a sneak peak:
Quote
"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
"
""Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."
"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."
"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."
"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."
Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!
All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.
I don't need to argue or debate against you. You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements. You lose to yourself.
The way you live your life IS your religion. If you make a change to your lifestyle once in a while, and don't do it very often, the contents of the change may possibly not be part of your religion.
Because of this, everything we do in life as part of our lifestyle is our religion.
Is atheism part of our personal religion? It might not be if we barely ever consider it, even though we believe it in a general way. The dividing line between religion and not religion is unclear.
You're wrong BADecker and frankly every statement there makes absolutely no sense.
The Latin root word, "religio," for our word "religion" means "to do." While this meaning hasn't been carried down to the English of today in its entirety, there is enough of that old meaning in "religion" that a person's life is his religion. Why is it his religion? It's because it is what he does.
If you live (do) according to the tenets of atheism, your religion includes atheism. If you push atheism, it may be your main religion. If atheism is strongly and adamantly adhered to, it is religion according to the dictionary definitions of the word "religion" because it is a belief that has no proof, and not even the strongest evidence.
Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.
Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.
Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:
Quote
religion
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?
Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:
Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.
As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.
I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?
There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.
Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.
That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion
At best, atheism is a philosophy.
Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.
If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.
Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.
You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.
None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.
Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.
There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.
Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.
It has to do with the extent or devotion.
Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.
Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit. Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.
Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?
By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts. From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.
Here's a sneak peak:
Quote
"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
"
""Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."
"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."
"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."
"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."
Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!
All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.
I don't need to argue or debate against you. You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements. You lose to yourself.
The way you live your life IS your religion. If you make a change to your lifestyle once in a while, and don't do it very often, the contents of the change may possibly not be part of your religion.
Because of this, everything we do in life as part of our lifestyle is our religion.
Is atheism part of our personal religion? It might not be if we barely ever consider it, even though we believe it in a general way. The dividing line between religion and not religion is unclear.
You're wrong BADecker and frankly every statement there makes absolutely no sense.
There is no God, so your statement means that atheists tinks we are nobody, Sorry try again. and what ignorant people wrote in books means nothing for people that dont think the books are holly
Keep in mind BD has been brainwashed as a child - he cannot look at the proof we provide because his head is in the sand.
His parent's did not love him enough as a child to let him choose his own beliefs. In turn, he will not love his own children enough to let them choose their own beliefs. That is how fairly tales spread - by taking advantage of the innocent and vulnerable.
Thank goodness people are moving away from his religion in droves. I don't think BD has the intelligence to join us, however.
Back in the 1920s and 1930s, people were moving away from God in droves. Then WWII came and people moved back to God in droves, and a whole lot faster.
We have Jade Helm - see the Jade Helm articles at http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/. When Jade Helm and it's follow-up become reality across the country, people will move back to God so fast that it'll make even your head spin.
Wow - some long quote threads.
I see BD still has his head in the sand. Poor kid never had a chance - you can tell his parents went at him when he was still a baby.
I see BD still has his head in the sand. Poor kid never had a chance - you can tell his parents went at him when he was still a baby.
Well, Vod, if you would stick your head into the sand once in a while, so that you are close enough to it that you can examine it, you would find that the complexity of simple sand is something that doesn't happen by chance. Thus, there is a Creator. The definition of this Creator in the dictionaries is "God."
There is no God, so your statement means that atheists tinks we are nobody, Sorry try again. and what ignorant people wrote in books means nothing for people that dont think the books are holly
Keep in mind BD has been brainwashed as a child - he cannot look at the proof we provide because his head is in the sand.
His parent's did not love him enough as a child to let him choose his own beliefs. In turn, he will not love his own children enough to let them choose their own beliefs. That is how fairly tales spread - by taking advantage of the innocent and vulnerable.
Thank goodness people are moving away from his religion in droves. I don't think BD has the intelligence to join us, however.
Atheists don't hate religion. They simply don't recognize that the Atheism that they love is really a religion in disguise, and that they are the gods of their religion.
Atheism is similar to Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that people are gods.
Atheism is different than Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that it is only people who accept Bible religion who are gods.
Atheism is similar to Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that people are gods.
Atheism is different than Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that it is only people who accept Bible religion who are gods.
There is no God, so your statement means that atheists tinks we are nobody, Sorry try again. and what ignorant people wrote in books means nothing for people that dont think the books are holly
But nobody has proof of this (the bolded part). In fact, there is a lot of evidence that can be interpreted that God does indeed exist.
Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.
Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.
Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:
Quote
religion
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?
Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:
Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.
As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.
I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?
There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.
Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.
That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion
At best, atheism is a philosophy.
Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.
If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.
Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.
You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.
None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.
Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.
There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.
Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.
It has to do with the extent or devotion.
Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.
Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit. Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.
Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?
By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts. From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.
Here's a sneak peak:
Quote
"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
"
""Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."
"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."
"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."
"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."
Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!
All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.
I don't need to argue or debate against you. You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements. You lose to yourself.
The way you live your life IS your religion. If you make a change to your lifestyle once in a while, and don't do it very often, the contents of the change may possibly not be part of your religion.
Because of this, everything we do in life as part of our lifestyle is our religion.
Is atheism part of our personal religion? It might not be if we barely ever consider it, even though we believe it in a general way. The dividing line between religion and not religion is unclear.
Atheists don't hate religion. They simply don't recognize that the Atheism that they love is really a religion in disguise, and that they are the gods of their religion.
Atheism is similar to Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that people are gods.
Atheism is different than Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that it is only people who accept Bible religion who are gods.
Atheism is similar to Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that people are gods.
Atheism is different than Bible religion because, both Old Testament and New Testament say that it is only people who accept Bible religion who are gods.
There is no God, so your statement means that atheists tinks we are nobody, Sorry try again. and what ignorant people wrote in books means nothing for people that dont think the books are holly
Do I hate religion? Well, I don't hate anything or anyone but I certianly dislike the idea of religion. I believe everything must be backed by something and I don't fall for Argumentum ad populum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum) just because everyone things it's true, just because everyone thinks it's right doesn't mean it is. Religion is an evil that causes hate for people and things for no reason other than it being written down in a magical book.
Wow - some long quote threads.
I see BD still has his head in the sand. Poor kid never had a chance - you can tell his parents went at him when he was still a baby.
I see BD still has his head in the sand. Poor kid never had a chance - you can tell his parents went at him when he was still a baby.
Atheism is a religion because atheists don't know that God doesn't exist. They simply believe it.
Doesn't follow logically. If the only attribute of religion was believing in something that can't be known, it might be accurate, but that's hardly the only attribute to religion. However, it's the only metric by which you're judging atheism.
Who is judging atheism? If the shoe fits, wear it. From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion?s=t:
Quote
religion
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
[ri-lij-uh n]
...
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
...
What else might atheism be, other than philosophy, since God hasn't been disproved, and there are multitudes who believe strongly that God exists?
Let's look at the most relevant definition of religion, because you took the sixth most relevant definition and tried to use it to prove your point:
Definition 1: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Atheism has one belief: there is no god. It is not a set of beliefs on the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe. It does not subscribe to belief in superhuman agency, ritual observances, or a moral code by which to govern the conduct of human affairs. Definition 1 fails entirely.
As for the rest of the definitions, there are no moral codes, rituals, or a defining theory of beliefs that originate from atheism, because atheism is only the belief in the nonexistence of god. That's the beginning and the end of atheism. To the extent there are patterns you recognize from atheists, it is from something that might more closely resemble a "religion" (like secular humanism), but in all relevant applications of the the word religion, atheism doesn't fit. There is no underlying moral code with atheism. The moral compass comes from other schools of thought, like Natural Rights Philosophy or Secular Humanism, not from atheism. The confluence of these schools of thought with atheism are complimentary, but coincidental.
I would agree that ambiguous definitions are not the best. But that is what we have. If one doesn't like the definitions of his particular religion, perhaps he should change the name of it to something that is less ambiguous. For example. Tis not "atheism," but rather tis "atheism - a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." However, rather a long "word," right?
There's no need to change the word. Atheism means something very specific: belief in the nonexistence of god. There are no other attributes to atheism. That's why it's not a religion. Because atheism is not associated with anything else you said. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Atheism is NOT a set of beliefs about the creation of superhuman agency. Atheism does NOT involve devotional or ritual observances. Atheism does NOT contain a moral governing code. All those things that apply to religion do NOT apply to atheism.
Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of god. FULL STOP.
That's precisely why atheism is a religion. There is no proof that God does not exist. There is ample evidence that could be attributed to the existence of God. Atheism as a belief is just that, a belief. It is not fact. And it is not very close to fact. Yet there are many people who hold to their belief in atheism very strongly. It is a bare-bones religion
At best, atheism is a philosophy.
Atheism is a belief, nothing more. It lacks every attribute of religion except for a belief in something. You're focusing on the one thing it has to the exclusion of all the things it doesn't. It's still not a religion, the same way that trigonometry is not a religion. Trigonometry has a lot more in common with religion than atheism does (such as rules for orienting knowledge, belief in irrefutable truths and concepts, etc.), but it's not a religion either.
If a person had never heard of trigonometry, then picked up a book that briefly talked about trig, he might be a believer in a religious sense, because he saw how trig could exist, yet had very little personal experience with it After the person learned trig and used it, he wouldn't have to be a believer, because then he knew about trig.
Any strong atheist who is a believer without knowing that atheism is full of holes regarding its truth, is really religious in his belief. If he knew about the holes, he might come away from strong belief in atheism, and atheism might become a philosophy to him.
You're conflating "beliefs" and "religion." Religion is built around beliefs. Beliefs are not religions. Your understanding of religion would necessitate the acceptance that every individual belief in the world is a separate religion. People who believe aliens crashed in Area 51: religion. People who believe in chemtrails: religion. People who believe Obama is a Muslim: religion. People who believe the fluoridation of water is a conspiracy to control the populace: religion.
None of these things are religions because beliefs are not religions.
Wrong. They are not religion when they don't fit the dictionary definitions of the word "religion." When they do, they are.
There is no difference between the belief in the nonexistence of god and the belief in any of the things I just listed. They're all just beliefs. Since none of them fit the dictionary definition, none of them are religions.
Somebody who knows about Islam or Christianity, and from these believes that God exists, but doesn't follow any of the formal religions devotedly, but rather, simply says that he believes in God, and then goes on with his daily life without considering the finer aspects of either religion, he probably is not a religious person regarding these religions.
It has to do with the extent or devotion.
Some folks in this forum adamantly proclaim that they are atheists and that Christians or Muslims are nut jobs. These people seem pretty devoted to atheism. Perhaps it is a religion for them while not for others.
Baseball players are devoted to their team and to team spirit. Wow cool. I guess baseball is a religion just like atheism and science.
Oh, what was that you were saying before about how Christianity *is not* a religion?
By the way, I was serious about making a thread of your contradictory posts. From the first 2 pages of your post history, I already have close to two-dozen contradictions.
Here's a sneak peak:
Quote
"C'mon you guys. This topic is serious."
vs.
"
""Atheists and theists use the same things. The only difference is their focus."
vs.
"Christianity is not really religion...science is one of the biggest religions out there, surpassed only by atheism."
"...the fact that science the scientific method are failed sciences."
vs.
"The scientific method is perfect with regard to itself. No limitations. But that is all it has."
"...Science is one of the biggest religions out there..."
vs.
"Science will never get to the goal it is looking for. Why not?...Only religion can do that."
"The point is, both atheists and theists don't know for a fact that God exists or doesn't exist, or that God can or can't affect things outside or inside the minds of any people."
"Christianity is not really religion. It is reality."
Bravo! You are finally getting the picture. Constant arguing and debate becomes a religion among those who partake of it willingly. Look at how many informal religions there are in the world!
All you're doing is applying the word "religion" to everything and anything where it loses all relevance to this discussion.
I don't need to argue or debate against you. You defeat yourself over and over by your own statements. You lose to yourself.
Jump to: