Religions And Atheism ...atheism _is_ a religion

[pixieloo 0]

off topic.
i was up in washington, and on a church's sign it said being a good person wont get you into heaven... that was the laughing joke on the way home

Actually, being a good person WON'T get you into heaven. The Bible says that in order to get to heaven, you have to believe that Jesus died for you and rose again. Just because you're good doesn't mean you're going to heaven.

I agree that atheism is like a religion. They believe that there isn't a God, and want to prove it (it can't be proved), and other religions say that there is a God, and want to prove it (which also can't be proved). There are so many heated debates about if there is or isn't a God. Watching an atheist argue that God doesn't exist looks the same as watching a Christian argue that God does exist.

[BooZker 0]

Ok let's get this straight. Yes, in all cases, no matter how you explain it or put it, Atheism IS a religion. Religion just means an organized community or a pursuit of interest in which someone ascribes extreme importance. Atheist, such as myself, to put importance on the fact there is no God or higher power. Because a group of people believe this and say they are Atheist it IS a religion. No matter how you put it. Now, being Agnostic is not a religion because it is not organized. They don't believe or disbelieve in a god or higher power.No matter how you put it however, Atheists are religious.

[biscuitrat 0]

Even if more people are becoming atheists, are they suddenly becoming worse people? In my opinion, they're becoming more independent and that leaves room for tolerance among all. Now there should be a specific category for me - I'm lazy and I believe in the organized functions of my religion, but I use the mythos only for entertainment and part of no personal belief.And of course, the fact that all religions are manmade, so you're still following the code of man...

[Cerebral Stasis 0]

I'm a big fan of philosophy and morals. Society couldn't exist without them, but religion is taking it a bit too far. Philosophies and morals keep societies together and bring about peace. Religions break people apart and cause wars. It's not worth it.

[Pyronide 0]

Personally, I wouldn't go so far to say that Atheism isn't a 'religion'.
A religion would be based off of a set of higher beliefs conservatively kept, mainly pertaining to a divine entity, but alternatively can be something material.

What makes individuals think otherwise is the fact that it is just one that doesn't promote 'spirituality' and 'faith' in a divine entity. (Science not being a divine entity. It is a matter of study and a philosophy that we can materialistically comprehend.)

...

Though, doesn't make you think that if perhaps Atheism can be considered a religion, then couldn't any philosophy for that matter be considered a religion. Therotetically, yes, it could. However, as far as majority comprehension, it just isn't.

-Pyronide

re‧li‧gion  /rɪˈlɪdʒən/[ri-lij-uhn] –noun

1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. 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.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.
8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.

[morosophos 0]

Atheism is not a religion in the strict sense, but it is a system of beliefs just as much as monotheism, polytheism, and deism are systems of belief. Each of these systems does not lay down strict religious doctrine or dogma, but they do create a basis of belief. For instance, monotheism---as the word would suggest---means "one god." This word by itself does not carry any specific implications with it, outside of the existence of only one god. However, the effects of the notion of monotheism can be seen in the derived religions themselves like Christianity, Islam, or Judaism: the first Commandment demands no idolatry and the worship of one god ("God"). Therefore, it can be seen that some specific characteristics of a given religion can be traced from its base ideology.

 

In some cases, the broader ideology has a graver effect on beliefs itself. A good example of this is pantheism on Hinduism. The idea of Brahman as the ultimate immanent, transcendent, obiquitous entity literally makes Brahman the "all god," the pan-theos. Atheism follows similarly, whereas atheism means "no god." Atheism is the affirmative belief that the situation is such whereas not any god exists, not to be confused with the belief that the situation is not such whereas any god exists. The former is atheism, but the latter is more unclear. For instance, if one believes in spirits, the latter still fits the description. Atheism is the belief that no gods exist at all. Since atheism is confirmed a belief, then, is it a religion?

 

A religion typically includes several aspects: a base theology, a specific theology, and then derived credos and doctrines. The individual components are far more fuzzy in far-eastern philosophy than western philosophy; separating Taoism into these components is a life's work, but something such as Christianity (I only continue to use this as an example because it can be related-to widely) is easily dissected. The idea of no worship of other gods but the one God is perfectly logical, provided the premise of there existing but one god. Therefore, with no god, what affairs follow? The idea that there is no god does not necessarily dictate that there is no morality, just that the morality must be derived from elsewhere than the Divine. The quickest resolution to the question is that human nature provides the answer to morality, or perhaps natural law.

 

If something as universal as human nature or natural law governs the specifics of atheism, than atheism truly is both a base ideology and a religion.

[deathzero 0]

Hello good east subject parese interesting and desidi to present to me my ideas on the different religions that there are in this world for that reason it will leave my commentary positive. good I believe in God my heart yet am catolico and have well my thoughts towards where go and for where boy, I am completely safe that God exists and that nothing or nobody can make doubt it. as far as this also I can say that God this in all sides is why have many religions of different ways to see the God world this has watching because all the religions are single in the end a unique that matters is what we ourself we created and we do have lives that I give of advice friends it Creates in God and lives the life to max God loves to me and to you also DONT/ FORGET!! you forget that is your father and it wants to YOU!!!!

[83perish 0]

Atheism is not a religion in the strict sense, but it is a system of beliefs just as much as monotheism, polytheism, and deism are systems of belief. Each of these systems does not lay down strict religious doctrine or dogma, but they do create a basis of belief. For instance, monotheism---as the word would suggest---means "one god." This word by itself does not carry any specific implications with it, outside of the existence of only one god. However, the effects of the notion of monotheism can be seen in the derived religions themselves like Christianity, Islam, or Judaism: the first Commandment demands no idolatry and the worship of one god ("God"). Therefore, it can be seen that some specific characteristics of a given religion can be traced from its base ideology.

 

In some cases, the broader ideology has a graver effect on beliefs itself. A good example of this is pantheism on Hinduism. The idea of Brahman as the ultimate immanent, transcendent, obiquitous entity literally makes Brahman the "all god," the pan-theos. Atheism follows similarly, whereas atheism means "no god." Atheism is the affirmative belief that the situation is such whereas not any god exists, not to be confused with the belief that the situation is not such whereas any god exists. The former is atheism, but the latter is more unclear. For instance, if one believes in spirits, the latter still fits the description. Atheism is the belief that no gods exist at all. Since atheism is confirmed a belief, then, is it a religion?

 

A religion typically includes several aspects: a base theology, a specific theology, and then derived credos and doctrines. The individual components are far more fuzzy in far-eastern philosophy than western philosophy; separating Taoism into these components is a life's work, but something such as Christianity (I only continue to use this as an example because it can be related-to widely) is easily dissected. The idea of no worship of other gods but the one God is perfectly logical, provided the premise of there existing but one god. Therefore, with no god, what affairs follow? The idea that there is no god does not necessarily dictate that there is no morality, just that the morality must be derived from elsewhere than the Divine. The quickest resolution to the question is that human nature provides the answer to morality, or perhaps natural law.

 

If something as universal as human nature or natural law governs the specifics of atheism, than atheism truly is both a base ideology and a religion.

 

respect man.

 

i would just like to add my opinion, that i consider myself a radical atheist, a man thet KNOWS, not belives, there is no such thing as god.

[BooZker 0]

respect man.
i would just like to add my opinion, that i consider myself a radical atheist, a man thet KNOWS, not belives, there is no such thing as god.

I consider myself a radical atheist also, but remember that you do not KNOW there is no god or that there is a god. You can only use facts from around you, but they will never prove or disprove god. You can not disprove Zeus either, but how many people think this is a real god? Not many. I'm guessing less then 1% of the world. So in a sense, and please don't take this the wrong way which others sometimes tend to do, but just about every single person on this Earth is an atheist. As one man said "Some just take it one step further"

I tend to think logical. Logically, yes there is more proof god is not existent, but i can not prove my point and neither can any Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, ect that god does exist.

[illroy 0]

2) Atheists, though not as well-organized as most religious people, do the same as religious people do - claim to have evidence about one or more god's existence (which is supposed to proof the non-existence of any gods).
Due to this behavior very similar to that of religious people, I suggest atheism should be considered 'some form' [sorry, I haven't thought this through yet either] of religion.

well, what shall we do with those who want to keep on claiming to be not religious?

I can certainly see why your name is brainless,
First of all to pressume that an Atheist is less organized than a religeous person such as yourself, is a fatal error, and a pompous lapse in judgement on your part. All the organization an Atheist needs has been provided throughout history in any and all religeons (your's included). A simple example of the sort of grey area that ANY and ALL religeons fail to cover is the fact that the foundational substance upon which they stand, requires a pathetic and Dangerous abandonment of the very tool and weapon that has ensured human survival to date as a species, and that is INTELLIGENCE! forsaking intelligence for faith is the order of BUSINESS of ALL reliegeons! For you to include "[sorry, I haven't thought this through yet either] " also proves you really don't understand what your talking about.
An Atheist does NOT believe, Repeat that! An Atheist DOES NOT BELIEVE! in God, they don't need to believe! YOU NEED to believe in something other than yourself in order compensate for the fact that as an animal you are weak of hand and slow afoot as compared to the rest of nature's creatures! Atheist accept personal responsibility for thier survival and for the survival of the Human race in clear practical "im cold, im hungry, im scared, im happy, im not" terms.

And of all the examples of Civilizations to use, you pick the Romans! as your PROOF! that God and or Jesus exists or existed!
I can rebut your "circumstantial clay pot physical evidence theory " with two words ....Tyranosaurus Rex!

Institutionalized faith sucks and will Destroy what good men and women have built for you to have the Luxury to take for granted. like the screen you are looking at and the chair your buttocks are in WAKE -T -F -UP!

[chopsticky 0]

"INTELLIGENCE! forsaking intelligence for faith is the order of BUSINESS of ALL reliegeons!"DEF #1. capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. So where do you suppose intelligence came from? And please don't tell me that it evolved from non-intelligence. Would it not take intelligence to pass on intelligence? Just some thoughts. Is intelligence tangible?

Edited January 13, 2008 by chopsticky (see edit history)

[mikeyboy63 0]

The root of the word religion is rule. A religion is a set of rules for people to support and abide. Adding a god or gods that will punish you for disobedience is secondary. You don't need gods to establish a set of rules, and atheists do support the rule of law.So yes, atheists are religious in the sense that they oppose anarchy and support rules. They don't invent gods to scare people into compliance.

Edited June 14, 2008 by mikeyboy63 (see edit history)

[gaspe86 0]

During the last couple of weeks, I have noticed that there are some people in this community who reply to posts dealing with religions that they are "not religious because they are atheists and don't believe in God".
In my opinion, this argument is inconsistent in two points:

1) By using the term "God", these people miss the point that there are not only monotheistic religions [Jews/Christians/Muslims - based on one and the same God. Read their holy scriptures before denying this and open a new thread if you want to discuss this...] but also polytheistic religions like most nature-bound religions [there are countless of them all over the world, the most well-known are the ancient greek and roman religions and Hinduism. I'm not sure about the existence of actual "Gods" in Buddhism right now].

2) Atheists, though not as well-organized as most religious people, do the same as religious people do - claim to have evidence about one or more god's existence (which is supposed to proof the non-existence of any gods).

Due to this behavior very similar to that of religious people, I suggest atheism should be considered 'some form' [sorry, I haven't thought this through yet either] of religion.

well, what shall we do with those who want to keep on claiming to be not religious?

There's still a way left to be able to express an opinion on religious matters which does not make it necessary to take a clear position on the existence of god(s):

"I am not able to prove God(s)'s existence but I am also unable to prove its non-existence [, but I have an opinion to the matter being discussed, regardless of god's influence or non-influence on this...]"

you got it all wrong my friend, atheism is not a religion not even close. We atheist do not spend time searching the non-existences of gods... we simply do not care about it. I don't care if christianity has Jehovah and Jesus, I don't care y Islam has Allah, I don't care anything. I just live my life without bothering to care if there is one god, two gods, three gods o none... it is not important to me.

[Wolfpack 0]

"INTELLIGENCE! forsaking intelligence for faith is the order of BUSINESS of ALL reliegeons!"

 

DEF #1. capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

 

So where do you suppose intelligence came from? And please don't tell me that it evolved from non-intelligence. Would it not take intelligence to pass on intelligence? Just some thoughts. Is intelligence tangible?

Is faith tangible?

 

Anyway, it does NOT take intelligence to pass on intelligence. Evolution is based on malformation and mistakes, that by a mere coincidence happened to be fitter to survive than whatever other method organisms used back then.

 

 

The root of the word religion is rule. A religion is a set of rules for people to support and abide. Adding a god or gods that will punish you for disobedience is secondary. You don't need gods to establish a set of rules, and atheists do support the rule of law.

So yes, atheists are religious in the sense that they oppose anarchy and support rules. They don't invent gods to scare people into compliance.

It's like religion, without a bible.

 

 

 

 

Well, I seem to be noticing the lack of agnostics in here! Am I alone?

 

I define myself agnostic, because I can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God, this doesn't mean I don't belive in one, but this also doesn't mean I think it affects my life.

 

God exists, what made the big bang explode? In fact, what created the mass the universe started from. Yep, God.

 

Not a god that cares, a god that punishes people for being bad or hell, a god that makes choices. I call that a god, the entity that made everything spin, but I don't think he is alive or anything.

 

Heres a paste from Wikipedia:

 

Agnosticism (Greek: α- a-, without + γνώσις gnōsis, knowledge; after Gnosticism) is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of God, gods, deities, or even ultimate reality is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable.

Agnosticism can be subdivided into several subcategories. Recently suggested variations include:

 

* Strong agnosticism (also called hard agnosticism, closed agnosticism, strict agnosticism, absolute agnosticism)the view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of an omnipotent God and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience.

* Mild agnosticism (also called weak agnosticism, soft agnosticism, open agnosticism, empirical agnosticism, temporal agnosticism)the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if more evidence is available.

* Apathetic agnosticism (also called Pragmatic agnosticism)the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of God or gods, but since any God or gods that may exist appear unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic anyway.

* Agnostic theism (also called religious agnosticism)the view of those who do not claim to know existence of God or gods, but still believe in such an existence. (See Knowledge vs. Beliefs)

* Agnostic atheismthe view of those who do not know of the existence or nonexistence of God or gods, and do not believe in them.[7]

* Ignosticismthe view that a coherent definition of God must be put forward before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed. If the chosen definition isn't coherent, the ignostic holds the noncognitivist view that the existence of God is meaningless or empirically untestable. A.J. Ayer, Theodore Drange, and other philosophers see both atheism and agnosticism as incompatible with ignosticism on the grounds that atheism and agnosticism accept "God exists" as a meaningful proposition which can be argued for or against.

I'm an agnostic atheist as you can see, I belive everything originated from god but it is not the loving and caring dude upthere we're being fed, just an entity like gravity or light.

 

 

I'm ending this thread by quoting Ingersoll's lecture Why I Am An Agnostic:

 

Is there a supernatural poweran arbitrary mindan enthroned Goda supreme will that sways the tides and currents of the worldto which all causes bow? I do not deny. I do not knowbut I do not believe. I believe that the natural is supremethat from the infinite chain no link can be lost or brokenthat there is no supernatural power that can answer prayerno power that worship can persuade or changeno power that cares for man.

 

I believe that with infinite arms Nature embraces the allthat there is no interferenceno chancethat behind every event are the necessary and countless causes, and that beyond every event will be and must be the necessary and countless effects.

 

Is there a God? I do not know. Is man immortal? I do not know. One thing I do know, and that is, that neither hope, nor fear, belief, nor denial, can change the fact. It is as it is, and it will be as it must be.

 

We can be as honest as we are ignorant. If we are, when asked what is beyond the horizon of the known, we must say that we do not know.

Agnosticism, the civilized man's religion.