Atheism Is Not A Religion!!!

[Hollie]

You may have 'read' Nietzsche but clearly you didn't understand what you read.

All manifestations of morality, values, and ethical conduct were created by man – whether in the context of religious dogma or not is irrelevant, where those free from faith are perfectly capable of morality, values, and ethical conduct absent any religion at all.

And what does that have to do with my post. I notice you like to give out random pieces of information that barely have anything to do with the discussion in an attempt to make yourself look smart. I was talking about nihilism what the hell does your little diatribe have to do with nihilism? Absolutely nothing. Do have any concept of what a discussion is and how a discussion is framed or do you just go off and say whatever random thing loosely connected to the subject that pops in your head?

Your post was a confused, ignorant rant wherein you hoped to Invoke Nietzsche as supportive of some point you hoped to make. It's clear you don't understand the writings of Nietzsche and never made the effort to actually read his works.

What the heck are you talking about? Nietzsche wrote volumes about how the waning influence and dissolution of Christianity would be problematic for European civilization. Christianity gave Europe meaning and purpose and with it's diminished influence Nietzsche believe that European civilization could be endangered by embracing meaninglessness and purposelessness i.e nihilism. It very obvious that it is you who never read Nietzsche because if you did you would know that he spoke of Christianity and what its dissolution would mean extensively in his works even though he was an atheist.

You may wish to do your homework about what christianity gave to Europe. Christianity spent 800 years maintaining an institution of fear and superstition that literally held back humanity from escaping the Dark Ages that christianity helped to maintain.

Roman Catholicism kept much of Europe from escaping the "Dark Ages." That organization did more to squelch the public reading of the Bible and its translation into the language of the general public than did any atheistic or pagan group. It was Protestantism that had the greatest influence on the wings of the Guttenberg press and the general public reading of Scripture, that freed more and more of Europe from Papist tyranny and non-biblical superstitious traditions.

Protestantism promoted salvation by Grace through Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin. Roman Catholicism promoted salvation through works, clergy manipulated absolution along with Papal succession. This is not to suggest all Catholics were/are unsaved and evil or that all Protestants were/are unsaved and righteous. It's simply that faith was placed squarely on the shoulders of the individual, requiring a personal relationship between a Christian and the Lord Jesus Christ through the leading of the Holy Spirit ------------------- and not the PAGAN influenced ideology that ritualism and one's organizational affiliation leads to righteous sanctification. This lead to FREEDOM of the Christian to seek the face of God and not servitude to any "church."

Someone call security, please?

 

[Hollie]

It depends on what you consider a religion. Satanism LeVey style is really more philosophy than religion to me, but it does also have trappings of magic involved which might make it fit into a definition of religion. From what I remember the use of anti-Christian, demonic style names is symbolic rather than from a belief those beings are real.

I would consider religion a practice ritual. It doesn't matter if people are doing it "ironically" or not.

Religion often has nothing to do with theism, it has more to do with socializing.

As I pointed out before, I'm a theist but I'm areligious.

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

Atheism is Not a Religion, Ideology, Belief System, Philosophy

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

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

The author of that article is so wishy-washy in his conviction that he actually tries to argue as to whether atheism is actually an "ism" or not. No longer is atheism a intellectual position that people take but rather it has become some sort of vague feeling one has like boredom. They actually want to redefine atheism as simply the lack of belief in gods just one could redefine a sociopath as one who simply lacks a belief in being nice to people. Play all the little dishonest semantic games you want but at least have the guts enough to take a stand for what you believe. This kind of bullshit semantics makes you look like a bunch of cowards.

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

 

[Hollie]

Let us know how prayers to the jeebus will resolve over-fishing of the world's oceans.

And you let me know how the Iphone is going is going to solve world hunger

Huh, whaaa? Did someone ever say it would?

Did I ever say praying to Jesus would solve over-fishing?

You're having trouble stringing words together into coherent sentences.

 

[CynthiaZ]

I would consider religion a practice ritual. It doesn't matter if people are doing it "ironically" or not.

Religion often has nothing to do with theism, it has more to do with socializing.

As I pointed out before, I'm a theist but I'm areligious.

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

Atheism is Not a Religion, Ideology, Belief System, Philosophy

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

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

The author of that article is so wishy-washy in his conviction that he actually tries to argue as to whether atheism is actually an "ism" or not. No longer is atheism a intellectual position that people take but rather it has become some sort of vague feeling one has like boredom. They actually want to redefine atheism as simply the lack of belief in gods just one could redefine a sociopath as one who simply lacks a belief in being nice to people. Play all the little dishonest semantic games you want but at least have the guts enough to take a stand for what you believe. This kind of bullshit semantics makes you look like a bunch of cowards.

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

 

[asaratis]

That is not exactly true. There are two religions that I know of that are atheist. Anton LeVey's church of Satan, and KSW.

Atheists who don't believe in a god also aren't going to believe in this god's supernatural competitor, and I have no idea what KSW is.

So no, I think that claim is false.

It depends on what you consider a religion. Satanism LeVey style is really more philosophy than religion to me, but it does also have trappings of magic involved which might make it fit into a definition of religion. From what I remember the use of anti-Christian, demonic style names is symbolic rather than from a belief those beings are real.

I would consider religion a practice ritual. It doesn't matter if people are doing it "ironically" or not.

Religion often has nothing to do with theism, it has more to do with socializing.

As I pointed out before, I'm a theist but I'm areligious.

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

I agree except in the supernatural nature of God. Nature is all that is in the universe today that is not man-made that came to exist by whatever vehicle after the big bang. What existed before the big bang? God. God is what set off the big bang. God exploded a well structurally organized, astronomically dense arrangement of matter, releasing all existing energy and the laws of physics and chemistry prevailed thereafter and forever more.

 

[asaratis]

Atheists seem to draw no distinction between natural and supernatural things. They do not accept that supernatural things exist because they cannot understand them...therefore they do not exist. To say that they do is 'laughable' and subject to ridicule.

Please provide testable evidence that any “supernatural” occurrence has ever, in fact happened. What you may not realize is that the assertion of “supernatural” suggests a different realm, that cannot be tested, cannot be accessed and cannot be quantified or qualified and is therefore no different from describing irrationality.

You know full well that tangible evidence of the supernatural does not exist. The fact that something is supernatural puts it out of the realm of human reason.

Why should I accept your claims to the supernatural when you admit your claims are untestable, unverifiable and that I must therefore accept them by way of your "because I say so", admonition.

Every discovery in the history of humanity has had a natural cause. Not a single, verifiable event in human history can be described by conceding "well, this event has no explanation by natural processes therefore, we can say with certainty, the gawds did it"

Feel free to share with us what “supernatural events” we should accept as indicative of a gawdly intervention. That’s actually a rhetorical comment because in my experience religionists are never able provide a meaningful context wherein their particular gawds can be described as the cause of some alleged supernatural event. It can be time consuming to address the confusions and errors inherent in religionist rhetoric and their actual content simply doesn't include anything at all of genuine interest.

So thrill us.

I've already dealt with the "because I said so" poppycock. I do not care what you believe or do not believe. Atheism is a religion. I don't expect you to believe that either...even though it has been clearly evidenced in this thread.

You too can be an Atheist Minister.

...and, by the way...I have never claimed that all unexplainable happenings are caused by God.

I found it comically tragic that you have declared your dealing with the "because I say so" poppycock and then proceed to announce "Atheism is a religion."

How do we know atheism is a religion?

".......because I say so"

No. Because there are Atheist Churches you can join. You can become an Atheist Minister. We've already seen that. The Scientology Movement is an atheistic movement. I have long suspected Communism to be an atheistic movement also.

 

[Hollie]

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

Atheism is Not a Religion, Ideology, Belief System, Philosophy

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

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

The author of that article is so wishy-washy in his conviction that he actually tries to argue as to whether atheism is actually an "ism" or not. No longer is atheism a intellectual position that people take but rather it has become some sort of vague feeling one has like boredom. They actually want to redefine atheism as simply the lack of belief in gods just one could redefine a sociopath as one who simply lacks a belief in being nice to people. Play all the little dishonest semantic games you want but at least have the guts enough to take a stand for what you believe. This kind of bullshit semantics makes you look like a bunch of cowards.

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

You're really rather desperate. Atheism is a conclusion regarding the non-existence of your gawds as well as the gawds of others.

There's no requirement for belief.

 

[CynthiaZ]

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

Atheism is Not a Religion, Ideology, Belief System, Philosophy

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

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

The author of that article is so wishy-washy in his conviction that he actually tries to argue as to whether atheism is actually an "ism" or not. No longer is atheism a intellectual position that people take but rather it has become some sort of vague feeling one has like boredom. They actually want to redefine atheism as simply the lack of belief in gods just one could redefine a sociopath as one who simply lacks a belief in being nice to people. Play all the little dishonest semantic games you want but at least have the guts enough to take a stand for what you believe. This kind of bullshit semantics makes you look like a bunch of cowards.

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

You're really rather desperate. Atheism is a conclusion regarding the non-existence of your gawds as well as the gawds of others.

There's no requirement for belief.

You can't not have your cake and eat it too. If atheism is not a intellectual stance then it has nothing to with reason or logic. If atheism is defined as simply the lack of belief then it is just a vague notion that pops up in people's heads.

 

[Inevitable]

Atheists who don't believe in a god also aren't going to believe in this god's supernatural competitor, and I have no idea what KSW is.

So no, I think that claim is false.

It depends on what you consider a religion. Satanism LeVey style is really more philosophy than religion to me, but it does also have trappings of magic involved which might make it fit into a definition of religion. From what I remember the use of anti-Christian, demonic style names is symbolic rather than from a belief those beings are real.

I would consider religion a practice ritual. It doesn't matter if people are doing it "ironically" or not.

Religion often has nothing to do with theism, it has more to do with socializing.

As I pointed out before, I'm a theist but I'm areligious.

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

I agree, atheism and for that matter theism is not a religion. I only stated that there is two religions that are atheist. All atheist means is that you don't worship any deity. It says nothing particularly about religion.


Atheism is Not a Religion, Ideology, Belief System, Philosophy

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

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

 

[Inevitable]

Atheists who don't believe in a god also aren't going to believe in this god's supernatural competitor, and I have no idea what KSW is.

So no, I think that claim is false.

It depends on what you consider a religion. Satanism LeVey style is really more philosophy than religion to me, but it does also have trappings of magic involved which might make it fit into a definition of religion. From what I remember the use of anti-Christian, demonic style names is symbolic rather than from a belief those beings are real.

I would consider religion a practice ritual. It doesn't matter if people are doing it "ironically" or not.

Religion often has nothing to do with theism, it has more to do with socializing.

As I pointed out before, I'm a theist but I'm areligious.

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

I agree except in the supernatural nature of God. Nature is all that is in the universe today that is not man-made that came to exist by whatever vehicle after the big bang. What existed before the big bang? God. God is what set off the big bang. God exploded a well structurally organized, astronomically dense arrangement of matter, releasing all existing energy and the laws of physics and chemistry prevailed thereafter and forever more.

I don't see God as supernatural. But that is simply my view.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Atheism is Not a Religion, Ideology, Belief System, Philosophy

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

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

The author of that article is so wishy-washy in his conviction that he actually tries to argue as to whether atheism is actually an "ism" or not. No longer is atheism a intellectual position that people take but rather it has become some sort of vague feeling one has like boredom. They actually want to redefine atheism as simply the lack of belief in gods just one could redefine a sociopath as one who simply lacks a belief in being nice to people. Play all the little dishonest semantic games you want but at least have the guts enough to take a stand for what you believe. This kind of bullshit semantics makes you look like a bunch of cowards.

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

You're really rather desperate. Atheism is a conclusion regarding the non-existence of your gawds as well as the gawds of others.

There's no requirement for belief.

You can't not have your cake and eat it too. If atheism is not a intellectual stance then it has nothing to with reason or logic. If atheism is defined as simply the lack of belief then it is just a vague notion that pops up in people's heads.

An intellectual stance is not a religion.

 

[asaratis]

It depends on what you consider a religion. Satanism LeVey style is really more philosophy than religion to me, but it does also have trappings of magic involved which might make it fit into a definition of religion. From what I remember the use of anti-Christian, demonic style names is symbolic rather than from a belief those beings are real.

I would consider religion a practice ritual. It doesn't matter if people are doing it "ironically" or not.

Religion often has nothing to do with theism, it has more to do with socializing.

As I pointed out before, I'm a theist but I'm areligious.

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

I agree except in the supernatural nature of God. Nature is all that is in the universe today that is not man-made that came to exist by whatever vehicle after the big bang. What existed before the big bang? God. God is what set off the big bang. God exploded a well structurally organized, astronomically dense arrangement of matter, releasing all existing energy and the laws of physics and chemistry prevailed thereafter and forever more.

I don't see God as supernatural. But that is simply my view.

I respect that view. I'm going by my understanding of dictionary definitions of natural and supernatural.

I think all things are either, natural, man-made or supernatural. I think God is not man-made as the atheist will claim. I think God existed before nature. Therefore, I think God is supernatural.

 

[asaratis]

The author of that article is so wishy-washy in his conviction that he actually tries to argue as to whether atheism is actually an "ism" or not. No longer is atheism a intellectual position that people take but rather it has become some sort of vague feeling one has like boredom. They actually want to redefine atheism as simply the lack of belief in gods just one could redefine a sociopath as one who simply lacks a belief in being nice to people. Play all the little dishonest semantic games you want but at least have the guts enough to take a stand for what you believe. This kind of bullshit semantics makes you look like a bunch of cowards.

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

You're really rather desperate. Atheism is a conclusion regarding the non-existence of your gawds as well as the gawds of others.

There's no requirement for belief.

You can't not have your cake and eat it too. If atheism is not a intellectual stance then it has nothing to with reason or logic. If atheism is defined as simply the lack of belief then it is just a vague notion that pops up in people's heads.

An intellectual stance is not a religion.

It becomes one when you a) preach it b) form groups of like believers c) establish churches d) ordain ministers.....all of which have been evidenced.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Let us know how prayers to the jeebus will resolve over-fishing of the world's oceans.

And you let me know how the Iphone is going is going to solve world hunger

Huh, whaaa? Did someone ever say it would?

Did I ever say praying to Jesus would solve over-fishing?

Jeebus, I'm talking about your iphone comment.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

You're really rather desperate. Atheism is a conclusion regarding the non-existence of your gawds as well as the gawds of others.

There's no requirement for belief.

You can't not have your cake and eat it too. If atheism is not a intellectual stance then it has nothing to with reason or logic. If atheism is defined as simply the lack of belief then it is just a vague notion that pops up in people's heads.

An intellectual stance is not a religion.

It becomes one when you a) preach it b) form groups of like believers c) establish churches d) ordain ministers.....all of which have been evidenced.

We've already been over this. Forming a group of people does not make it a religion. And I would imagine the purpose for ordained ministers, is for unconventional weddings. An atheist "church" is nothing more than a community center, where they play music and have pot-luck lunch.

 

[asaratis]

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

You're really rather desperate. Atheism is a conclusion regarding the non-existence of your gawds as well as the gawds of others.

There's no requirement for belief.

You can't not have your cake and eat it too. If atheism is not a intellectual stance then it has nothing to with reason or logic. If atheism is defined as simply the lack of belief then it is just a vague notion that pops up in people's heads.

An intellectual stance is not a religion.

It becomes one when you a) preach it b) form groups of like believers c) establish churches d) ordain ministers.....all of which have been evidenced.

We've already been over this. Forming a group of people does not make it a religion. And I would imagine the purpose for ordained ministers, is for unconventional weddings. An atheist "church" is nothing more than a community center, where they play music and have pot-luck lunch.

Go way back in this thread...you'll find links to the web pages.

See post #82

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not believing in religion is not a religion. How dumb are you folks?

Atheism is without theism. It really isn't without religion, that would be areligious. I am an areligious theist.

And there are two religions that don't believe in God. One was Anton LeVay's church which you stupidly claimed worships Satan. Proving how dumb you are. A quick Google search will reveal the truth. And scientology which has no deity.

Atheism is completely without religion. I know this because as soon as I became an atheist, I lost my religion. That's the great thing about being an atheist....it requires so little of your time.

That is not exactly true. There are two religions that I know of that are atheist. Anton LeVey's church of Satan, and KSW.

Atheists who don't believe in a god also aren't going to believe in this god's supernatural competitor, and I have no idea what KSW is.

So no, I think that claim is false.

Anton LeVay's church of Satan doesn't believe in any God or supernatural competitor. My claim is accurate.

KSW is the church of scientology. They don't believe in a god or gods thus they are by definition atheist.

I'm not saying all atheists are scientologists or members of the church of Satan. I'm just saying that there are religions that are atheists.

I listed two.

Actually not.

You listed religions that have no 'gods,' which has nothing to do with being free from faith.

Being free from faith means just that: being free from faith, both acknowledging the fact there is no 'god' as perceived by theists, and not abiding by any type of religious doctrine or dogma.

Being free from faith is consequently not 'religion.'

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

Atheism is Not a Religion, Ideology, Belief System, Philosophy

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

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

The author of that article is so wishy-washy in his conviction that he actually tries to argue as to whether atheism is actually an "ism" or not. No longer is atheism a intellectual position that people take but rather it has become some sort of vague feeling one has like boredom. They actually want to redefine atheism as simply the lack of belief in gods just one could redefine a sociopath as one who simply lacks a belief in being nice to people. Play all the little dishonest semantic games you want but at least have the guts enough to take a stand for what you believe. This kind of bullshit semantics makes you look like a bunch of cowards.

You fundie zealots have a difficult time understanding some pretty basic concepts. Concluding your gawds don't exist is a rational, reasonable conclusion.

The "bullshit semantics" is nothing more than your stunted ability to resolve clearly defined terms and conditions.

Yes it is bullshit to say that atheism is simply a lack in belief, that is a redefinition of the term which as traditionally been defined as an intellectual stand in which theism is negated. Atheism is not simply a lack of belief, it is affirmative stance that denies the existence of God. Characterizing atheism as "simply a lack of belief" means that atheism is not an intellectual stance based on reason or logic but more or less a feeling one has.

You're really rather desperate. Atheism is a conclusion regarding the non-existence of your gawds as well as the gawds of others.

There's no requirement for belief.

Correct.

Being free from faith is the acknowledgment of facts and the truth, having nothing to do with 'belief.'

Man invented religion to assuage his fear of death and as a consequence of being aware of his own mortality, having nothing to do with deities or anything 'supernatural.'

All that is religion is learned, taught or self-taught, indoctrination or self-indoctrination, or a combination thereof, all the creation man, all devoid of divinity, all equally false and imbued with man's fears, faults, and failings.

 

[Inevitable]

I would consider religion a practice ritual. It doesn't matter if people are doing it "ironically" or not.

Religion often has nothing to do with theism, it has more to do with socializing.

As I pointed out before, I'm a theist but I'm areligious.

I'd agree that rituals are a defining attribute of religions to include belief in one or more supernatural beings/entities, practices common to the religions' doctrines, a hierarchy of leadership, etc.

It seems to me that tagging the cult's of LeVay and Scientology is stretching the definition of religion. Remember, for example that Hubbard started Scientology on a bet and had few takers until he found a way to appeal those who had personalities / psychologies that were a "fit" for Dianetics.

I don't think belief in supernatural beings is the slightest bit relevant.

I say scientology is atheist because they fit the only criteria, which is no belief in God.

I agree except in the supernatural nature of God. Nature is all that is in the universe today that is not man-made that came to exist by whatever vehicle after the big bang. What existed before the big bang? God. God is what set off the big bang. God exploded a well structurally organized, astronomically dense arrangement of matter, releasing all existing energy and the laws of physics and chemistry prevailed thereafter and forever more.

I don't see God as supernatural. But that is simply my view.

I respect that view. I'm going by my understanding of dictionary definitions of natural and supernatural.

I think all things are either, natural, man-made or supernatural. I think God is not man-made as the atheist will claim. I think God existed before nature. Therefore, I think God is supernatural.

Well it's good to talk to somebody that can respect somebody else's view. And I respect yours as well.

To me, nature is the way God works. They aren't separate.

 

[Inevitable]

Atheism is without theism. It really isn't without religion, that would be areligious. I am an areligious theist.

And there are two religions that don't believe in God. One was Anton LeVay's church which you stupidly claimed worships Satan. Proving how dumb you are. A quick Google search will reveal the truth. And scientology which has no deity.

Atheism is completely without religion. I know this because as soon as I became an atheist, I lost my religion. That's the great thing about being an atheist....it requires so little of your time.

That is not exactly true. There are two religions that I know of that are atheist. Anton LeVey's church of Satan, and KSW.

Atheists who don't believe in a god also aren't going to believe in this god's supernatural competitor, and I have no idea what KSW is.

So no, I think that claim is false.

Anton LeVay's church of Satan doesn't believe in any God or supernatural competitor. My claim is accurate.

KSW is the church of scientology. They don't believe in a god or gods thus they are by definition atheist.

I'm not saying all atheists are scientologists or members of the church of Satan. I'm just saying that there are religions that are atheists.

I listed two.

Actually not.

You listed religions that have no 'gods,' which has nothing to do with being free from faith.

Being free from faith means just that: being free from faith, both acknowledging the fact there is no 'god' as perceived by theists, and not abiding by any type of religious doctrine or dogma.

Being free from faith is consequently not 'religion.'

Being free from faith has nothing to do with atheism.

Faith is another word for trust. Or belief. If atheists don't believe in anything they are actually nihilist

All atheism means is the absence theism, not the absence of faith. I have plenty of atheist friends that have faith in their children and in their Spouses, even in things that they can't know.

If they didn't believe in anything they would be nihilists