Are you Religious or Atheist OT?

That's inherently impossible. You can't believe in them all. There are inherent contradictions to the premise. If the Quran is the "real" religion, then to believe in Krishnu is to have a death sentence. Any "good" Muslim would kill you on Allah's will. You cannot but interpret the "god" of the old testament as a very petty, vindictive, and cruel god. That god would demand you kill the Muslims. Even though both believe in the same god, as they are branches of Abrahamic text, the two religions have their very real, very different interpretations of that god. So when they debate whose religion is "real" and "true," they see different gods. We haven't even broached the dead religions (It's wasn't always Greek *Mythology).

What I'm saying is this: You can't know what you are talking about while making claims that we should just believe in every religion. That statement doesn't make any sense. Religions are mutually exclusive, ESPECIALLY when you are dealing with monotheistic religions. It's inherent in their nature to NOT get along with other religions.

One thing I've noticed is that a basic difference between informed theists, and informed atheists is that their separation comes down to a simple idea. The religious view faith as a virtue. The sceptics see faith as a vice. Faith would be defined as a belief in something for no reason. I think a lot of times people mistake "faith" and "hope." Let me give a quick example: "I have faith this big guy in the dark alley won't rape me." That use of the word is inappropriate. It should be hope. A good use of the word "faith" would be "I have faith that, in reality, this leprechaun/unicorn hybrid on my shoulder is telling me to worship it and punch myself in the nuts every morning as a sacrifice to it's glory. I can't see it. It has no effect on my life. But I have faith it IS there, and it wants me to behave like X, and maybe there's a reward."

Anyways...religions are mutually exclusive. If you don't know what that term means; it means claims of differing religious dogmas CAN'T all be true.

I'd like to point out foxhound knows what he's talking about here. Belief is pretty worthless. I'd rather know, than believe anything. In fact...I make an active effort to suspend my belief. It gets in the way of me actually knowing anything.

That would be my stance as well. You exist? Great. Now get away from me, "Father".

Science doesn't disprove god, but you can't disprove a negative. If god really doesn't exist then there's no way we could conclusively know it, the issue is whether that confirms or disconfirms his existence. From a scientific perspective, I really don't see much justification for the former. This doesn't mean god doesn't exist, it just means that the perspective of science is such to create a system of positive knowledge, and we can have no positive knowledge either way of god. To me it means that faith rests outside of science, that they are two different ways of knowing the world. Faith, almost by definition, is unconcerned with proof.

What I think you're not understanding is the amount of power religion wields in all societies. Religion is more than just beliefs about deities, it is a social construct used to organize humans and moderate their social interactions. It is hierarchical, it is semi-exclusive, it is intrinsically tied to power dynamics. As Bertrand Russell once said "Religion, in most of its forms, can be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the government." If it was simply about thinking one explanation for how the world works was true then Christians wouldn't feel the need to ostracize people who don't share their beliefs and call their character into question. They wouldn't feel the need to enshrine their beliefs into law. Just the fact that you're demanding reverence for your beliefs in exchange for minority recognition shows the inherent power dynamic. People don't dislike religion because of prejudice, they dislike it because it has wielded so much social power, decided who are the social outcasts in society, decided what right and wrong are, bestowed honors on those who obey its rules without question and shame on those who dare to object. If you want people to like religion, take away its power. If you want religion to have power, then make peace with the fact that people will resent it.

I don't care if my old church cured cancer and AIDS and wiped out hunger and poverty, I'd still want to take a wrecking ball to it. You don't get to treat people the way they treated me and then turn around and talk about all the good you. You want people to recognize you as being good? Start by being good to the people closest to you.

Hindus worship Women Deities. Durga, Lakshmi,Parvati,Saraswati,Kaali,Vaishno Devi.

Im atheist because i have no proofs myself about any god in existence. If i see a god with my own eyes then ill beleive no doubt.

I beleive in nature and universe as "my gods" if you get what i mean.

Get over it. You never have and never will win any debate with me if i start with you :I

You never win any debate with anyone on OT, but you sure know how to start one thats the fact :I

@thegerg: "The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being."

Which seems logical. Religion can be just about a belief in anything.

Somehow Scientology is considered a religion, so who knows lol.

@thegerg: Did you read it? If a bunch of guys want to get together to discuss their disbelief in God, how is that different from people getting together to discuss their belief in God? "God" can take any form. Some worship the Earth. Some worship science. Some peoples worship involves disproving God exist, in a supreme form. If you're atheist, why not just say you're non-religious instead? Unless you're really out to prove there's no God. That takes action and belief in what you're saying is true.

@thegerg: Well that makes sense... Kinda like how Christianity isn't a religion. My original comment was based off the title of the thread, which was "Are you Religious or Atheist?". My comment was reflecting that you can be both if you claim to be Atheist.

@thegerg: This clarifies it somewhat. It seems to have changed meaning a bit throughout history.

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/

It's odd how it claims you can be a Catholic and an atheist at the same time. Not sure how that's possible.

@joshrmeyer: the link brings up a 404 error.

Anyway your showing a lack of understanding on what atheism actaully means

@thehig1: Yeah, because that's a subject everyone really digs deep in to lol... It's like the "I'm cool" term kids use to rebel against their parents.

@joshrmeyer: what ?

Your posts are showing you do not know what atheism means, atheism means your not a theist and that's it.

I dunno man...I laid out an argument pointing out the absurdity of having faith in all religions (a page back I think) and you ignored it. I am not sure you want to debate the issues.

Had my share of conversations regarding my faith in my religion in this thread. Sorry, if you felt ignored man. You don't know gerg very well do you? Stay more on OT and you will find out how it goes once you get into 'any' discussion with him lol. Discussion about religion is good, talking to a wall who sees no reason, understanding ain't.Energy better spent elsewhere HeHe

Yeah, I don't personally really know anybody here. I know I've talked to you quite a bit (your avatar!) I get what you mean...lot's of convo's going around. Anyways...I argued against the possibility of embracing faith in all religions prior...I'd, honestly, be interested in your' response if you get bored today. Or not. I LOVE discussing religion. And politics. It's how we all learn, right?

Dismiss what you are talking about, because it makes no logical sense. How is it different to believe something from not believing in something? That should be telling.

Atheists don't worship the earth. Generally...atheists don't worship anything (fetishes aside, lol).

If a group gets together for social support against believing in the tooth fairy, that's a lot different than people gathering to worship said fairy. To argue that a common disbelief is some kind of "religion" is such a stretch it really takes the meaning out of the word religion. Does that make sense?

Didn't study it, but I'm more logical man so I'd say either Atheist or really don't care.

I ain't discussing anything with you regarding religion specially. You know nothing about religion and don't want a to waste my time/energy and a get a Headache unneccassarily :)

If you claim so, be it your way :)

See and that's an issue I take up with atheist. They think it's fine to make fun of someone for their religion and say stuff like " your religious beliefs aren't above criticism" or "You believe in fairy tales" . That's fine with me as long as atheist don't get butt hurt and start playing the "victim card" when religious people or people in general criticize their life choices and beliefs. Sadly, that is not the case and it's just lame. They like making fun of people for believing in God and their religious beliefs and lifestyle, but the moment you say something that ISN'T positive about LGBT community, woman who chose abortion, people that get drunk or do drugs all the time that person gets labeled as an intolerant, hateful bigot out to "oppress" everyone with their archaic beliefs. That kind of crap just kinds my gears you know? Just show respect even if you don't agree with someone's beliefs or lifestyle. Or if not, then don't whine or cry about someone being intolerant when you yourself are intolerant.

I see the argument came up, yet again, trying to label atheism as a religion.

Firstly, let's establish what a religion actually is.

Dictionary.com defines "religion" as:

1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
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.
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:

So, let's dig deeper.

1. Does atheism contain a core set of beliefs? I think this is the biggest point here, so let's establish this first. Firstly, Buddhism is in general, an atheistic religion. It has no real central God or deity per se, and only focuses on the practice of a set of beliefs and rituals (philosophically at least, Buddhism to most practising Buddhists definitely has a deity they worship, regardless of what a Westerner or academic might claim otherwise).

Now, if Buddhism is defined as "atheism" then does that make all atheists Buddhists? Secular atheists agree upon many things, especially through science, but there is no agreement with regards to the second half of this definition. There is no superhuman agencies, devotional or ritual observances, nor overarching moral code that is common among all atheists. For atheism to "be a religion" it would require these things.

2. As covered in point #1, there is no fundamental set of beliefs shared among all atheists. They have highly variable moral/ethical values (i.e. some might be against software piracy while others are not), they have no shared political affiliation, and for the most part, they do no congregate on a regular basis to practice any shared rituals.

3. Now we are seeing a common thread within these definitions. Shared beliefs among a group of people. Aside from a lack of belief in a deity/the supernatural/etc, what do atheists actually share amongst themselves? They come from all cultural and ethnic backgrounds, they all have differing opinions about most non-religious affairs and many are outwardly non-religious (lacking any real practice of any religious rituals or beliefs).

5. I think the phrase "ritual observance of faith" best sums up religion in the smallest sentence possible. A ritual observance is something that would be learned through traditional practice, and faith is something an atheist definitely does not have. Faith is belief without evidence, and generally (not including religious atheists like Buddhists), atheists lack belief in anything that would require faith. They use science, logic and reason to come to conclusions about themselves and the universe.

6. This last point is one that I thought also important. In general, a secular atheist does not hold their beliefs "devotedly". They would gladly believe/accept something as fact if given sufficient evidence for it's existence. Most tend to lack belief in a God or the supernatural for the sole reason that there is no evidence to support it's existence. And this is regardless of what any religionist might believe to be the case.

Something not covered in this dictionary definition is a shared holy text among the group. Very commonly, a religion is defined by a set of values laid down in an ancient holy text that is usually written in a dead language and can only be effectively translated and transmitted through often-times deity-appointed officials. Only in the past couple hundred years, and the advent of the printing press and Renaissance secularism, has the academic study of religion opened the doors for outsiders to learn about a religion's inner workings.

In conclusion, we can define religion as:

1) A unified set of affirmative beliefs in deities and/or supernatural agencies that comments about the origin and nature of the universe, shared by a group of people.
2) A set of ritual observances practiced devotedly by a group of people.
3) A set of moral and/or ethical values ascribed to by a group of people.
4) A set of beliefs revealed in a holy text, passed down through generations as the "source" of all the beliefs and practices.

Does atheism fulfill these defining points?

Note: "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins or "god is not GREAT" by Christopher Hitchens do not qualify as holy texts.

I believe there is a God, but I do not necessarily believe in the Bible.

I believe those who think their God wants them to kill people are batshit crazy assholes.

@demi0227_basic: I was just going by what the Supreme Court says... Atheist get the same benefits as any other religion, even if they just congregate to talk about the lack of a God or diety, or whatever they talk about. I personally wouldn't call them a religion, but more of a belief system. Just like Christianity isn't a religion. But Atheism, according to law, is a religion (in the U.S.). This has become a dumb conversation now. And talking about atheist is probably one of the worst waste of my time.

@thehig1: atheism

[ey-thee-iz-uh m]

noun

the doctrine or belief that there is no God.

disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

^^^Seems easy enough to understand.

@foxhound_fox: As much as I believe you, the Supreme has said otherwise. I don't think Scientology should be considered a religion with tax free everything. But hey, it just shows you can start a religion even following fictional books.

@joshrmeyer: disbelief or lack of belief, not belief there is no God. Believing there is no god is not atheism.

What are you talking about exactly? I haven't heard of a single atheist group in the US getting tax exempt status.

@thehig1: I used dictionary.com ... Guess we can pick and choose which website to believe.

So an atheist disbelieves in the belief that there's a God? Confusing.

Isn't believing there is no God and disbelieving there is a God pretty much identical, just worded differently?

I haven't either...even if it did, that doesn't mean it's a "religion." Since when does the supreme court hold the definition of a word? Atheism isn't a religion, regardless of any court cases or tax exempt groups. It's not useful to the conversation we are having either way.

You most likely don't have a belief in "God." Your reference to not believing in the bible tells me you were raised in a western culture, and didn't have the ideas ingrained into your head. If you believe the stories of the bible literally, then you'd be that religion (whether you were surrounded by baptists/mormons/catholics/etc).

Since you don't "believe" in the bible (whatever that means), though you reference a believe in said god (your bible phrase showing it to be an christian interpretation of said god), you are most likely an atheist that hasn't really thought it through that much.

Most atheists were religious at some point, and then reflected on the dogmas associated with a particular religion. I was catholic and moved to Utah. I made fun of the Mormons and their crazy beliefs, until I ask the same questions about my own religion. That was the beginning of my road. Most people don't actually believe in their own religion very much...whatever is useful is cherry picked out of their text, while leaving behind the things that aren't useful.

On a side note...there are a lot of people here that say live and let live, in regards to religion. As an atheist, I'd ask why? There are REAL results in terms of human suffering because of religion. Tens of millions of women (maybe more?) have been mutilated. Same for men. More men are genitally mutilated in the USA then not. Are you? The catholic churches crusade against birth control has killed tens of millions of people.

As a rationalist (another word for atheist, if you will), I see these things and have to complain. My attacks on religion aren't personal. While it can be fun to tease particularly silly stories out of all of these ancient texts, the real hope for atheists is to limit human suffering, and maximise the pleasures we have available. Many religions have positive side effects. This is also true. But these can be argued to have more to do with sociological arguments. In effect, we could still have charity without the fairy tales.

People that are agnostic are atheists just waiting to come out.

I mean, this is the crux of the flying spaghetti monster argument, or Russell's teapot. You don't get people going around saying "I disbelieve in a giant teapot between the earth and the sun," but then again, you don't get a bunch of people going around saying "I believe in a giant teapot between the earth and the sun, and if you don't you're going to hell!" There's really an infinite number of things we can disbelieve in, and in fact we all do on a regular basis. However, due to the social influence of religion, god is really the only one that people are forced to actively state that they disbelieve in.

@demi0227_basic I forget who it was who said "When you realize why you reject everyone else's gods, then you'll realize why I reject yours."

Anyway, the agnostic part made me laugh. I don't like to fully disavow the title because I believe in keeping an open mind. There legitimately could be some being that would at least appear like a god to humans, and that being could have caused the big bang. I think the likelihood is extremely low, and I certainly refuse to order my life according to religion just on the possibility that it might be true, but it's still a possibility.