Is atheism a religon?

No.......Yea im atheist I believe in nothing, I have a picture of nothing hanging on my wall and pray to it every night hoping for something:| my god is nothing, you better believe in nothing

TChaivong

[QUOTE="TChaivong"]

No.......Yea im atheist I believe in nothing, I have a picture of nothing hanging on my wall and pray to it every night hoping for something:| my god is nothing, you better believe in nothing

Frame_Dragger

if it did, wouldn't it be something :shock:

It's Sephiroth from Final Fantasy VII

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="iamveryangry"] lol k What particularly confuses me is that you seem to genuinely have a fairly okay knowledge of the - ahem - 'psychics' you're talking nonsense about (ignoring the fact that you seem to have had to look up the spacetime interval on Wikipedia).iamveryangry

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="TChaivong"]

No.......Yea im atheist I believe in nothing, I have a picture of nothing hanging on my wall and pray to it every night hoping for something:| my god is nothing, you better believe in nothing

if it did, wouldn't it be something :shock:

It's Sephiroth from Final Fantasy VII

I don't think it follows that atheists are religious because they are atheists. I think Universal Unitarianism is the nearest you can get to non-religious ChristianityRationalAtheist

I'm not saying that atheists are religious because they are atheists. I'm saying that an atheist(s) can become religious when he begins to produce statements about what people should and should not do (dogma) based on his belief in atheism.

These phenomena are theorised and catered for within natural law. Much previously inexplicable, miraculous and supernatural stuff has been naturally explained in the last few hundred years with discovery.

RationalAtheist

I agree with what you say here, but I still don't agree with your definition earlier: The supernatural is that which has no current natural explanation.

No, that is not to say atheists cannot be religious.Socijalisticka

OK, I'll bite... how so? I undersand how you can be an atheist and still be raised in a particular religion, but be religious?

@iamveryangry: Oh... you're taking your time to do a little fast-research? This should be good. :P

[QUOTE="Socijalisticka"]No, that is not to say atheists cannot be religious.Frame_Dragger

OK, I'll bite... how so? I undersand how you can be an atheist and still be raised in a particular religion, but be religious?

@iamveryangry: Oh... you're taking your time to do a little fast-research? This should be good. :P

So what's a religon then? Is that like a 26-sided shape or something?

@cheezisgoooood: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatheism (and a little fodder for iamveryangry). Look, I understand that in your opinion, this is a binary issue. I disagree, but you seem to be leaving it at the level of opinion, and you're not making any effort to so much as google a word like apatheism. I'll debate this with you, but, it SEEMS like you're expressing an opinion, not pressing a point. I have no desire to attack your personal view of things, so which is it?Frame_Dragger

Atheism is indeed a religion where a person worships false gods like themselves, other people, money, power, fame, etc., rather than the one true and living God. The one true and living God who invites everyone to turn to Him and be saved.MathMattS

Atheism is indeed a religion where a person worships false gods like themselves, other people, money, power, fame, etc., rather than the one true and living God. The one true and living God who invites everyone to turn to Him and be saved.MathMattS

how does one worship themselves if they seek to understand their limitations and not overestimate their nature?

also, how does one find out which god is the one true god?

Is there a religion or a term in which you want there to be a god but do not partake in any religious activities or have any religious connection? I thought it was Agnostic but found out there is where you question it's belief.shadowkiller11

There is, Deism.

[QUOTE="MathMattS"]Atheism is indeed a religion where a person worships false gods like themselves, other people, money, power, fame, etc., rather than the one true and living God. The one true and living God who invites everyone to turn to Him and be saved.cheezisgoooood

But really is anything adding to the discussion? This thread has gotten nowhere. Clearly, the people who think atheism is a religion, immoral, a cult, etc. are not going to accept any other answers. Any logical person can acknowledge that atheism is simply the lack in the belief of a deity. It is not a religion. However, as stated by a user way back on the first page, religions can either be atheistic or theistic. Buddhism is an example of an atheistic religion, while Islam is an example of a theistic religion.RACiEP

Most of what I've seen from mainstream Buddhism does involve gods. Not that this really adds much to the discussion, but I recall visiting a Buddhist temple in Taiwan where I saw several statues and ornaments on display meant to represent gods of luck and fertility etc. They would burn incense and pray to these gods.

Most of what I've seen from mainstream Buddhism does involve gods. Not that this really adds much to the discussion, but I recall visiting a Buddhist temple in Taiwan where I saw several statues and ornaments on display meant to represent gods of luck and fertility etc. They would burn incense and pray to these gods.

cheezisgoooood

[QUOTE="cheezisgoooood"]

Most of what I've seen from mainstream Buddhism does involve gods. Not that this really adds much to the discussion, but I recall visiting a Buddhist temple in Taiwan where I saw several statues and ornaments on display meant to represent gods of luck and fertility etc. They would burn incense and pray to these gods.

RACiEP

Some sects of Buddhism do feature various deities and similar entities, many of them left over from indiginious belief systems. Buddhism is pretty syncrestic, so as it spread and more regions adopted Buddhism they would meld their previous belief systems into their Buddhist practice and thus create different forms of Buddhism. However even at that none of the deities are really worshiped per se, but rather used more like tools for mental focus. And there are just as many forms of Buddhism that make no use of deities at all (Zen Buddhism, which I personally ascribe to, for example).

And the Buddha didn't really reject the idea of a creator as much as he refused to consider the question. He called it "imponderable". Basically he held that it was impossible to know one way or the other, that a person would just cause themselves much vexation in trying to figure it out, and that it really had no bearing on what he was teaching anyway, so he just didn't really give the subject any time.

I do not believe that humans evolved from Neandathals or any other hominid, theres certain facts that just dont add up...sonofsmeagle

Atheism must be a religion, because users on the internet preach it like it is one.

Is it under the religion category? Then yes...

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]I don't think it follows that atheists are religious because they are atheists. I think Universal Unitarianism is the nearest you can get to non-religious ChristianityPalantas

I'm not saying that atheists are religious because they are atheists. I'm saying that an atheist(s) can become religious when he begins to produce statements about what people should and should not do (dogma) based on his belief in atheism.

These phenomena are theorised and catered for within natural law. Much previously inexplicable, miraculous and supernatural stuff has been naturally explained in the last few hundred years with discovery.

RationalAtheist

I agree with what you say here, but I still don't agree with your definition earlier: The supernatural is that which has no current natural explanation.

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

Never seen an atheist worship the sun or the law of gravity.

Idk maybe some do.

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

Mephers

I find it humorous that you attack atheists' intelligence, yet in your sig where you are again, attacking atheists, you fail to construct the sentence properly. It should read working "at" McDonalds, not working McDonalds. Unless you're inferring that atheists work street corners and tend to take the McDonalds sectors.

Edit: And I see your sig has been removed. Nevermind.

[QUOTE="Mephers"]

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

commonfate

I find it humorous that you attack atheists' intelligence, yet in your sig where you are again, attacking atheists, you fail to construct the sentence properly. It should read working "at" McDonalds, not working McDonalds. Unless you're inferring that atheists work street corners and tend to take the McDonalds sectors.

Edit: And I see your sig has been removed. Nevermind.

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

[QUOTE="Mephers"]

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

Mephers

I find it humorous that you attack atheists' intelligence, yet in your sig where you are again, attacking atheists, you fail to construct the sentence properly. It should read working "at" McDonalds, not working McDonalds. Unless you're inferring that atheists work street corners and tend to take the McDonalds sectors.

Edit: And I see your sig has been removed. Nevermind.

It was at the bottom of your previous post. Your previous post has not been edited, therefore it must have been your sig... which is no longer there. Either you removed it or it was removed by a mod. Either way my point still stands. You're attacking the supposed intelligence of atheists yet you have poor syntax yourself. That doesn't mean you're less intelligent than the next person but it decries you of any credibility.

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

[QUOTE="Mephers"]

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

Mephers

I find it humorous that you attack atheists' intelligence, yet in your sig where you are again, attacking atheists, you fail to construct the sentence properly. It should read working "at" McDonalds, not working McDonalds. Unless you're inferring that atheists work street corners and tend to take the McDonalds sectors.

Edit: And I see your sig has been removed. Nevermind.

He didn't remember a random post, he was referring to the signature you had just a few minutes ago.

[QUOTE="Mephers"]

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

I find it humorous that you attack atheists' intelligence, yet in your sig where you are again, attacking atheists, you fail to construct the sentence properly. It should read working "at" McDonalds, not working McDonalds. Unless you're inferring that atheists work street corners and tend to take the McDonalds sectors.

Edit: And I see your sig has been removed. Nevermind.

commonfate

It was at the bottom of your previous post. Your previous post has not been edited, therefore it must have been your sig... which is no longer there. Either you removed it or it was removed by a mod. Either way my point still stands. You're attacking the supposed intelligence of atheists yet you have poor syntax yourself. That doesn't mean you're less intelligent than the next person but it decries you of any credibility.

His lack of evidence to support his assertion of a correlation between 100% proud Atheists and occupation at Mcdonalds also brings into question his credibility.

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

[QUOTE="Mephers"]

Yeah ....Im not interesting enough to stalk so ill just assume you remembered a random post

mattisgod01

It was at the bottom of your previous post. Your previous post has not been edited, therefore it must have been your sig... which is no longer there. Either you removed it or it was removed by a mod. Either way my point still stands. You're attacking the supposed intelligence of atheists yet you have poor syntax yourself. That doesn't mean you're less intelligent than the next person but it decries you of any credibility.

His lack of evidence to support his assertion of a correlation between 100% proud Atheists and occupation at Mcdonalds also brings into question his credibility.

[QUOTE="Mephers"]

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

I find it humorous that you attack atheists' intelligence, yet in your sig where you are again, attacking atheists, you fail to construct the sentence properly. It should read working "at" McDonalds, not working McDonalds. Unless you're inferring that atheists work street corners and tend to take the McDonalds sectors.

Edit: And I see your sig has been removed. Nevermind.

commonfate

It was at the bottom of your previous post. Your previous post has not been edited, therefore it must have been your sig... which is no longer there. Either you removed it or it was removed by a mod. Either way my point still stands. You're attacking the supposed intelligence of atheists yet you have poor syntax yourself. That doesn't mean you're less intelligent than the next person but it decries you of any credibility.

You could try explaining your point instead of resorting to the old "LOL YER DUMB":roll:
Edit: :roll: and he talks about credibility

[QUOTE="mattisgod01"]

[QUOTE="commonfate"]

It was at the bottom of your previous post. Your previous post has not been edited, therefore it must have been your sig... which is no longer there. Either you removed it or it was removed by a mod. Either way my point still stands. You're attacking the supposed intelligence of atheists yet you have poor syntax yourself. That doesn't mean you're less intelligent than the next person but it decries you of any credibility.

Mephers

His lack of evidence to support his assertion of a correlation between 100% proud Atheists and occupation at Mcdonalds also brings into question his credibility.

Not upset, I'm just a big fan of graphs and was hoping you'd provide one.

You could try explaining your point instead of resorting to the old "LOL YER DUMB":roll:
Edit: :roll: and he talks about credibility

Mephers

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

Mephers

[QUOTE="Mephers"]

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

Frame_Dragger

I'd assume you are getting trolled.

Atheism must be a religion, because users on the internet preach it like it is one.

NiKva

Atheism must be a religion, because users on the internet preach it like it is one.

NiKva

Short answer? No.

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="Mephers"]

Technically yeah, but its rare youll find an atheist who actually knows this. Half the self proclaimed "Athiests" ive met cant even spell atheist right, so good luck getting a straight answer.

I'd assume you are getting trolled.