Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[¿]

Look:
Religion:
Either answer is 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 which is a religion by the dictionary!

No, no and no.

You Mean:

Either answer is 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 which is a religion by the dictionary!

A belief that a God DID NOT create the universe, nature, or purpose is a belief CONCERNING THE CAUSE, NATURE, AND PURPOSE OF THE UNIVERSE, ESP. WHEN CONSIDERED AS A CREATION OF SUPERHUMAN AGENCIES.

Neither does it turn "anarchist" into an organization

Except when they organize.

[G-Flex]

You can stop talking before actually reading people's points now.

A belief that a God DID NOT create the universe, nature, or purpose is a belief

Atheists do not necessarily hold that as a belief at all.

I've had to say this how many times now and you haven't listened?

Also, there's a difference between one particular belief concerning that stuff, and a set of them. Atheism, even if it DID mean "belief that there is no god" would only be one particular factor in any sort of religious (or other) belief structure. In itself, that one belief wouldn't really say much about anything and doesn't stand on its own, as all it would be is a refutation of some other particular belief. A belief that God isn't real says nothing about what you believe IS real, and does not stand on its own at all as a belief structure.

Again, if believing that something isn't real constitutes a "religion", then all of us belong to an infinite number of "religions".

And - I'm going to say this again because you apparently don't understand - atheism itself does not necessitate that you believe God doesn't exist. It only necessitates that you lack the belief that God does exist.

[¿]

atheism itself does not necessitate that you believe God doesn't exist. It only necessitates that you lack the belief that God does exist.

Then there are atheists that are of an Atheist religion, and those that aren't because they don't know what to believe.

Again, if believing that something isn't real constitutes a "religion", then all of us belong to an infinite number of "religions".

Again: The NRA, as someone sarcastically said earlier, is not a religion, because they have no set of beliefs concerning God or the purpose of life and such.

And yes there are an infinite number of religions, everyone has their own religion, that's however many trillions there are and have been, because everyone has their own personal spin to their set of beliefs.

I've had to say this how many times now and you haven't listened?

You are only setting aside SOME atheists. The others are of the Atheist Religion. It's a religion, even if not all atheists are a part of it, as much as Christianity is a religion even if not all Christians are part of it.

[LegoLord]

I'm technically a christian, but just because that's how I was born and there's no point changing, based on my complex belief.

Basically, in runs on the hypothesis that it is possible that all religions are right at their core, and that some of the facts of what happened were "corrupted" (not evilly, just using that for lack of a better word).  This would explain, for example, why so many religions include similar myths.

In more complex terms, I believe that "lesser gods" that are part of polytheistic religions are synonymous with "angels."

I even believe that atheists are at least partially correct, in that even though there is nothing proving/disproving the existence of a God or gods, there is nothing controlling the events of the universe (something that even religion itself suggests - many of them talk of free will, which could not happen if there was too much divine intervention).

In short, I try to be in a sort of "universal state of belief" - something that can neither be proven right nor wrong and that doesn't upset anyone, where I can walk up to anyone and say:  "You're (mostly?) right!"

It needs work, though.  There's still the minor problem of the creation (all creation myths are just stories).  God is the universe/made the universe, possibly is science?  I'm really not sure what could be a middle ground for that topic, but I don't think anyone can ever really know, either.  Bridging religion and atheism is the really tricky part, but I'm trying to work it in too.

All these definitions of it seem to vary greatly, so I don't think it has any solid definition.  Therefore, I think I should recommend Terry Pratchett's Small Gods.  It'll really make you think hard about just what belief is, and takes a humorous approach to it. 

But really, religious discussions are somewhat pointless, because no one can really know what the hell is going on.  It could turn out that God (or gods) is watching you carefully right now . . . or he might not even exist to do so.  No matter how much you discuss it, you will never really find out.  Regardless of what belief is, I feel that it's safe to say that that is what it is for.  So just don't worry about others' beliefs or lack thereof, or even if it can be lacking. You believe or don't believe what you believe or don't believe, and that's all that really matters.

(also note: if something here offends you, I probably just poorly articulated it, because I'm trying to do the exact opposite of offend.  But this is long and I can only see so much of it at once while typing it.)

[Earthquake Damage]

Basically, in runs on the hypothesis that it is possible that all religions are right at their core, and that some of the facts of what happened were "corrupted" (not evilly, just using that for lack of a better word).  This would explain, for example, why so many religions include similar myths.

Alternately, instead of indicating some degree of truth, the similarities may only mean they developed from the same, shall we say, protoreligion(s).  Those protoreligions themselves may have blended over time as different cultures interacted, with group X borrowing a myth from group Y and so forth.

[¿]

I'm treading glass!

Yarrrr! Speak what you think to-day in words as hard as cannon-balls and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.

[LegoLord]

What?  No, seriously, what are you talking about Mr. upside-down-? ?

[G-Flex]

atheism itself does not necessitate that you believe God doesn't exist. It only necessitates that you lack the belief that God does exist.

Then there are atheists that are of an Atheist religion, and those that aren't because they don't know what to believe.

Augh. Where the hell should I begin?

Where do you get off thinking that not having a belief in God means you "don't know what to believe"? Seriously.

And THERE IS NO ATHEIST RELIGION. I've already MADE that point and so have others. Atheism, no matter how you define it, does not constitute a religion.

And if you want to actually make a counter-argument instead of making broad, sweeping generalizations about people you don't understand at all, seriously, please do.

Again, if believing that something isn't real constitutes a "religion", then all of us belong to an infinite number of "religions".

Again: The NRA, as someone sarcastically said earlier, is not a religion, because they have no set of beliefs concerning God or the purpose of life and such.

And yes there are an infinite number of religions, everyone has their own religion, that's however many trillions there are and have been, because everyone has their own personal spin to their set of beliefs.

Thank you for completely missing what I was saying.

You're saying that believing a god doesn't exist constitutes a religion.

If this is the case, and that disbelief in one thing constitutes a religion, then there are an infinite number of religions constituted by disbelief in one thing (e.g. a religion defined by disbelief in norse gods, a religion defined by disbelief in reincarnation, a religion defined by desbelief in creationism, etc.) and we all belong to an infinite number of them. This makes no sense, obviously.

I've had to say this how many times now and you haven't listened?

You are only setting aside SOME atheists. The others are of the Atheist Religion. It's a religion, even if not all atheists are a part of it, as much as Christianity is a religion even if not all Christians are part of it.

Wow.

First off, if you are Christian, then you have religion, period. Being a Christian is defined by a few things, such as belief in God, belief in Christ as the Son of God, belief in his religious teachings, etc. This is a complex belief structure composing a religious system, even if it varies from Christian to Christian, and even if they aren't part of some organized group.

And no, there is no Atheist religion. I am sorry. Atheism does not comprise a set of beliefs about anything, at all. The only thing atheism itself concerns itself with is whether or not there's something we could call a "god". It says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about anything else those people may believe religiously.

[Sergius]

You Mean:

Either answer is 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 which is a religion by the dictionary!

A belief that a God DID NOT create the universe, nature, or purpose is a belief CONCERNING THE CAUSE, NATURE, AND PURPOSE OF THE UNIVERSE, ESP. WHEN CONSIDERED AS A CREATION OF SUPERHUMAN AGENCIES.

Neither does it turn "anarchist" into an organization

Except when they organize.

NO!

It would NEVER turn "anarchist" into an organization! It would create ONE Anarchist organization (oxymoron nonwithstanding). "anarchist" will never, ever EVER be an organization. Do you have comprehension problems? Do you have trouble separating an abstract concept with a single instance of a group of people gathering?

Creating an "Art school" does NOT make "art" a type of school. Please think before posting.

[Cheeetar]

Theistic : Religious
Atheistic : Not religious

[¿]

@G-Flex:
You:
Some atheists DON'T outright believe in the non-existance of God.
Me:
BUT Some do. They have 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. THAT is a religion by definition. THEREFORE there is an atheist religion.

@Serius:
Do you have trouble separating an abstract concept with a single instance of a group of people gathering?
It would create ONE Atheist Religion (oxymoron nonwithstanding). Do you have comprehension problems? That is exactly what I told you earlier, and you agree with my anarchist comparison. I'm telling you, once they organize 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 they are a religion, and yes, it's oxymoronic.

@All of you!

broad, sweeping generalizations about people you don't understand at all

I am NOT saying "All Atheists are of an atheist religion or even a religion." I'm saying "Atheism is one of the religions". AKA "It is a religion".

Please think before posting.

edit:
@Cheeetar:
a⋅the⋅ist
   /ˈeɪθiɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ey-thee-ist] Show IPA
–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Inherently they have 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.

re⋅li⋅gion
   /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ri-lij-uhn] Show IPA
–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.

That falls under the definition of religion.

EDIT:

First off, if you are Christian, then you have religion, period. Being a Christian is defined by a few things, such as belief in God, belief in Christ as the Son of God, belief in his religious teachings, etc. This is a complex belief structure composing a religious system, even if it varies from Christian to Christian, and even if they aren't part of some organized group.

Being a Christian is defined by a few things, INCLUDING a common effort, which although is no physical organization, it becomes one when they are working in proximity.

I'm getting really tired of this and the insults. I give no insults to you other than your own, mind you. As frustrated you are at me "not understanding you", you must realize it is the same for me.

[Earthquake Damage]

I am NOT saying "All Atheists are of an atheist religion or even a religion." I'm saying "Atheism is one of the religions". AKA "It is a religion".

You statement is simply misleading.  An atheist religion may be a subset of atheism, but atheism itself is not a religion.  A theistic parallel:  Christianity is a subset of monotheism, but monotheism is not a religion.  The way you worded your statement reads similar to "Monotheism is one of the religions."

I'd also like to note that I too often see people appeal to dictionaries as though they were some higher authority (that's not to say I'm innocent).  Firstly, not all dictionaries have precisely the same definition, as their word choice may be interpreted differently.  Secondly, it's silly to say "this is the definition, so your argument is wrong," then have someone else pull the same shenanighans on you using a different definition.  Might I suggest agreeing on working definitions of key terms to avoid semantic arguments? 

[¿]

@ Earthquake:
There exists an Atheist religion. Alright? I'm tired of saying this. First thing I ever said in this thread:

As soon as a common belief system becomes coordinated, it's a religion or a cult.

Both the first definition, which I've posted enough, and the second:

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

Apply to the subject of the thread, organized atheists. They are of a religion. Sure, there are atheists that aren't, but some are.

You statement is simply misleading.  An atheist religion may be a subset of atheism, but atheism itself is not a religion.  A theistic parallel:  Christianity is a subset of monotheism, but monotheism is not a religion.  The way you worded your statement reads similar to "Monotheism is one of the religions."

Religion: 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. Yes?
Major kinds of religious beliefs, as in, concerning things in the above definition, even if it is that they are against the things in the above definition as that is still concerning things in the said definition as is the definition of a religion:

POLYTHEISTIC - - -Animism, wikka, etc
MONOTHEISTIC - -- Judaism, Islamic, etc
ATHEISTIC - - - - - Atheism. That's it.
(AGNOSTIC?)

You sort of see enough of what I'm saying now I think I can stop saying it.

An atheist religion may be a subset of atheism, but atheism itself is not a religion.

Depending on the Atheist.

higher authority

I was under the impression you did not believe in higher authorities. Har har.

[inaluct]

So, you're saying that modern science is a religion?

[¿]

You've never heard that said before?
Although, it does not lay out a purpose. It does not have any reference to superhuman or supernatural anything when defining cause, purpose, etc. It only gives cause.