• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is atheism a religion[W:711:831]

Is atheism a religion


  • Total voters
    119
Re: Is atheism a religion

They drag you down to their level and beat you into submission with the soggy end of their vast experience.

It's odd how no one can answer whether or not they believe that there is no god.

It's even odder how kneejerk some atheists can be about the idea that their dogma and that of a religion can be so similar.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

It's odd how no one can answer whether or not they believe that there is no god.

It's even odder how kneejerk some atheists can be about the idea that their dogma and that of a religion can be so similar.

Good news will be brought to you by mail.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

Of course I dont believe in anything I dont want to believe in.

Nice dodge though.
charger+dodge++.jpg


The bible is folklore, it fits the definition of the term. Im not sure why you are trying to deny that fact. Well unless you dont understand the meaning of the word? Perhaps you should look it up?

Yeah, why not. Let's look it up so you can feel smart.

FOLKLORE:
Noun
1. The traditional beliefs, customs, and stories of a community, passed through the generations by word of mouth.
2. A body of popular myth and beliefs relating to a particular place, activity, or group of people.


Well, since the Bible is not myth, it doesn't qualify under the definition of "folklore."

Nice try though.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

One man's myth is another man's truth.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

Fine, I'll play it your whiny way, instead of the actual challenge I offered you. Your specific interpretation of the myriad interpretations of the Christian god (we're assuming no trinity for the moment, but you won't even commit to that one way or the other) is a logical impossibility because he a) gives us free will, b) fashions our souls individually, and c) punishes those souls based on whether or not we believe in him. Those three facts can't be true. If we're punished merely for thinking something, we certainly don't have free will. If we're designed individually, we don't even have a choice in what we'll think anyway. Some of us have skeptical personalities, and some do not. None of that is consistent with any sort of rational system of rewards or punishment, and since it is supposed to apply to and motivate human beings, it must operate in a rational fashion to be effective. Except that telling us about afterlife and judgment circumvents free will anyway, since it is a threat of force to coerce us to change our minds, so no free will either way. Free will is a big part of the Christian god myth.

However, I'm just as bored with this as you are, because you're not playing by the rules. I have no interest in trying to figure out which god you want to offer or what its parameters are. I could have offered that the timeframe asserted to the life of Jesus is fictional as well. The census that supposedly coincided with his birth never happened, nor was Judea actually properly governed by Rome at the time, and thus wouldn't have been subject to it anyway, nor would any such census require people to go to other cities where their ancestors lived. No Roman census ever required anyone to do that. That never happened, and yet is a central fixture in the story of the gospels. Meanwhile, it is said to have taken place when Herod was the king of the region, and while Cyrenius was the governor of Syria. But Cyrenius was appointed only after Herod's death. So not only did such a census never take place, but it is claimed to have taken place during a time period that did not exist.

I could have offered that, but you haven't yet claimed whether or not your god requires the stories to be accurate.

Honestly, Grimm, this entire thread is just you flailing around and accomplishing nothing, refusing to use the same words, terms, and ideas as everyone else, and sticking your fingers in your ears and trying to shout over everyone else. I doubt you've learned anything from this thread.

That's funny that you're accusing me of sticking my fingers in my ears when you're doing exactly that.

For one, it's possible for both free will and determinism to coexist, because you and I are cogs in a much larger wheel. For instance, I know that you're never going to agree with my religious views. Does that mean it's pre-determined? Does that mean you lack free will? Of course not.

In your own limited universe, you have free will. In the larger universe, you do not. Everyone here (the larger universe) knows you will not suddenly turn around and accept Christ, but that does not mean you lack free will, because in your mind, you choose not to accept Christ.

That was rather easy. On to the next point.... your historical musings on the life of Christ. All I can say is you're asserting a lot of things without providing a sliver of evidence.

Give me links, show me some proof, not just you making claims.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

You don't understand the most basic aspects of what I believe. Do you spend your day actively "believing" that President Obama isn't going to going to come over to your house today and ask to watch Sons of Anarchy with you? If you don't think he'll do that, does that make you an "-a-Obama-will-visit-you-ist"?

Technically, yes. However, it's clearly more important to have a concept of "atheism" than it is to have a concept o "a-Obama-visitme-ism" in the cultural lexicon, for obvious reasons.

Or do you simply not take the idea seriously because there's no good reason to think that's something he would do? It's the same here with atheists and God. The overwhelming majority of us don't spend a single second on the topic of God (except when it comes up in debates of course), we just don't have any reason to believe in God. How that translates into "religion" in some people's minds is abstract beyond comprehension for me.

I never said atheism was a religion.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

As opposed to anti-theism, which is what you keep trying to claim is atheism. Do the Greek.

I'm claiming that not believing in something is the same as believing that something doesn't exist. There is absolutely no difference, conceptually.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

It's a belief about the way the universe is. That's also what a religion is. Hence the alignment.

Not true. Would you call Kant, Descartes, Plato, Socrates, etc. religious people, or founders of religions? They are philosophers. It's possible to make an existential assertion about the nature of reality without being religious in nature.

Religion necessitates a set of doctrines and practices that followers must ascribe to. Atheism does not fit the bill.

And some people are totally non-religious at all and consider it like a religion. This makes atheists made. Their anger, though, doesn't change that.

Not sure I understand what you mean here.

Sure it is. It's a belief system.

It's not a system. Systems require many points of reference, and religious systems require doctrines and principles that one must adhere to in order to be considered followers. There are no atheist churches, no atheist services, no glue that holds all atheists together in solidarity; there are no symbols, no spiritual texts, nothing. It's the absence of all of that.

Buddhists are atheists, yet they are still considered a religion because they have a set of spiritual doctrines and principles that must be followed in order for spiritual work to be considered valid. You can also be an atheist and a scientist. Atheism lies separate from other philosophies. It just means you don't believe in God(s).

Beliefs about the nature of the universe and how it came to be.

Incorrect. You're conflating material reductionism with atheism. While many material reductionists are also atheists, the two are mutually exclusive. Atheism means you don't believe in God. That's it. There's nothing else. An atheist making a claim about the nature of the universe beyond that is using other philosophies as a platform.

vesper said:
But can't atheists be just as dogmatic in there rejection of religion as theists are in their beliefs?

Atheists can certainly be dogmatic. The very definition of a dogmatic person is one who believes their view of reality is true and cannot be argued with.

However, there are many types of atheists. Some are open to the idea that there could be a God if there were proof, while others thing it can never be known.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

Not true. Would you call Kant, Descartes, Plato, Socrates, etc. religious people, or founders of religions? They are philosophers. It's possible to make an existential assertion about the nature of reality without being religious in nature.

I would, actually, but let's say they're not: do Taoists have a religion, then? Or are they just philosophers? If you say Taoism isn't a religion, then we're good. You're consistent, anyway.

Religion necessitates a set of doctrines and practices that followers must ascribe to. Atheism does not fit the bill.

How many doctrines and practices? You should have a list or something, yes? If there's a very specific thing needed, you should be able to tell me what it is. How many doctrines? Of what kind? For how long?

Not sure I understand what you mean here.

Some people aren't religious, don't believe in god (or that god doesn't exist, for that matter) and consider atheism to be a religion. The point is what someone 'thinks' about their beliefs is kinda irrelevant. I can say I love Mohammed, think he's the true prophet, and then turn around and say I'm not religious. It doesn't make it true. Just like how atheists go on and on about how they know there's no god, but then say that that's not a religious belief.

It's not a system. Systems require many points of reference, and religious systems require doctrines and principles that one must adhere to in order to be considered followers. There are no atheist churches, no atheist services, no glue that holds all atheists together in solidarity; there are no symbols, no spiritual texts, nothing. It's the absence of all of that.

No one said it was a system.

Buddhists are atheists, yet they are still considered a religion because they have a set of spiritual doctrines and principles that must be followed in order for spiritual work to be considered valid. You can also be an atheist and a scientist. Atheism lies separate from other philosophies. It just means you don't believe in God(s).

Which is a religious belief.

Incorrect. You're conflating material reductionism with atheism. While many material reductionists are also atheists, the two are mutually exclusive. Atheism means you don't believe in God. That's it. There's nothing else. An atheist making a claim about the nature of the universe beyond that is using other philosophies as a platform.

No, I'm not. An atheist actively doesn't believe there's a god. That's a religious belief.

I'm coming to the conclusion that some atheists are so rigidly and doggedly against the idea of a god (often just known as 'religion', but that doesn't entail all of it, as we've seen) that they bristle at the idea of "religious" or "religion" describing them in any way whatsoever. So much so that they'll argue about for damn near 40 pages. The Pavolovian response in them is so strong that they can't help but fight against the very word. But that's too bad. The more they believe, the more they care, the more they fight...the more it describes them.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

It's odd how no one can answer whether or not they believe that there is no god.

It's odder that you insist that people who refuse to fit into your square hole can't possibly be an atheist. Figure that one out.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

I'm claiming that not believing in something is the same as believing that something doesn't exist. There is absolutely no difference, conceptually.

Because apparently finding someone not guilty in court is exactly the same as finding them factually innocent? :roll:
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

It's odder that you insist that people who refuse to fit into your square hole can't possibly be an atheist. Figure that one out.

If you can't answer, please sit down. Make a drink.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

If you can't answer, please sit down. Make a drink.

We have answered, you just keep ignoring any answers you don't like. But go ahead, keep standing there making a fool of yourself, it's entertaining.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

We have answered, you just keep ignoring any answers you don't like. But go ahead, keep standing there making a fool of yourself, it's entertaining.

Really? Can you link me to someone answering?
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

Anyway, I'll repeat it, since it's clear that's what we're seeing here:

I'm coming to the conclusion that some atheists are so rigidly and doggedly against the idea of a god (often just known as 'religion', but that doesn't entail all of it, as we've seen) that they bristle at the idea of "religious" or "religion" describing them in any way whatsoever. So much so that they'll argue about for damn near 40 pages. The Pavolovian response in them is so strong that they can't help but fight against the very word. But that's too bad. The more they believe, the more they care, the more they fight...the more it describes them.

And again: I say this as someone that doesn't believe in god.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

I'm coming to the conclusion that some atheists are so rigidly and doggedly against the idea of a god (often just known as 'religion', but that doesn't entail all of it, as we've seen) that they bristle at the idea of "religious" or "religion" describing them in any way whatsoever. So much so that they'll argue about for damn near 40 pages. The Pavolovian response in them is so strong that they can't help but fight against the very word. But that's too bad. The more they believe, the more they care, the more they fight...the more it describes them.

We're against the idea of a god in the same sense that we're against the idea of unicorns. Yet there doesn't happen to be a bunch of unicornists running around trying to force their unicorn beliefs on society or get their unicorn ideas enshrined in law. That is, however, what happens every day with theists. We're not against any gods, we don't believe any exist. We're against idiot theists who are trying to force their absurd god beliefs on us.

And again: I say this as someone that doesn't believe in god.

That doesn't make you a rational person though.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

Not true. Would you call Kant, Descartes, Plato, Socrates, etc. religious people, or founders of religions? They are philosophers. It's possible to make an existential assertion about the nature of reality without being religious in nature.



Buddhists are atheists, yet they are still considered a religion because they have a set of spiritual doctrines and principles that must be followed in order for spiritual work to be considered valid. You can also be an atheist and a scientist. Atheism lies separate from other philosophies. It just means you don't believe in God(s).

I am of the understanding that Buddhism is not about believing or not believing in God or gods. Only that God is not necessary to realize what they claim as enlightenment. Just because you find God or gods unnecessary, doesn't mean a Buddhist denies the existence of one. So wouldn't Buddhism be more nontheistic than atheistic?
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

We're against the idea of a god in the same sense that we're against the idea of unicorns.

Okay. That's a belief about unicorns, then.

Yet there doesn't happen to be a bunch of unicornists running around trying to force their unicorn beliefs on society or get their unicorn ideas enshrined in law.

That's great.

That is, however, what happens every day with theists.

Yeah, sucks.

We're not against any gods, we don't believe any exist.

Which is a religious belief.

We're against idiot theists who are trying to force their absurd god beliefs on us.

Far out, I agree.

That doesn't make you a rational person though.

It makes me laugh at how you can't even go a paragraph without going on a screed against people who believe in god, which reinforces why I think you're so against the label "religious". You're religious, though. Sorry!
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

****in' religious people. Always trying to push their beliefs down your throat.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

****in' religious people. Always trying to push their beliefs down your throat.

I've never done that. Not here or in real life either. So unfair to overgeneralize in this way.
 
Re: Is atheism a religion

As opposed to your own founded arrogance, you mean? :roll:

I don't know, I'm not the one who called over half the world's population "delusional," as if you know better than they do. That pretty much defines "arrogance."
 
Back
Top Bottom