Is it just me or is Atheism a religion?

Philosphy Forum ^ | FR Post 12-6-2003 | "A Sloth"

[vannrox]

This is a subject near to my heart and my own spiritual journey, and I'd like to discuss it with as many intelligent minds as possible as I ponder it. It seems to me as though the most basic, intrinsic aspect of a religious philosophy is faith. I have been talking to a lot of Christians lateley, so I'm not sure if that is the prevailing veiw among people of other persuasions. Anyways, it seems to me as though a religion can really be boiled down to beliving that it is THE answer, and it seems to me as though atheism is no exception.

But this is where I came to realize there many different brands of thought given the title of Atheist, each with their own twists. Here are some categories that i have run across, and my opinion(just roll with me on this one):

Spiritual Atheists Some people claim to be "spiritual" but not "religious," disavowing belief in a god persay in favor of just not thinking about the issue. It sounds just lazy to me. They get the "all good people go to heaven" feeling without defining good, heaven, or even feeling itself. This may work for some, but it seems to lack any real thought into the matter.

Non-Practicing Atheists And there are the "Catholics" like my parents who dont buy a word the church says, but are so afraid of what it means to be atheist that they desperately cling to a religion that offers them no real meaning.

Deist Atheists Some people use Atheism to describe a sense of disbelief in the major established world religions, which to me sounds like it could still be a throwback to the deism of the 18th century. Basically it can be summed up as: There is some kind of god, hes a pretty decent guy, dont be an ass and everything will turn out ok somehow, once again, a little too lazy for me.

Orthodox Atheists Then there are the Atheists so absolutly steadfast in their disbelief in god that they would have made an excellent Christian in another life (THAT's an interesting turn of phase!). They dont buy the proof that the various religions offer, but the seem to narrowmindedly rule out any possiblities except absolute soulless oblivion. I have a friend like this, and i have yet to figure out how he can 100% FOR SURE rule out a higher power of any type...

Agnostics This is the only one that really makes sense to me. I mean, maybe there's a god. Probably not one of the big religion's vengeful, mythical "gods" with their spotty and doubtfully accurate "historical records," I doubt reincarnation that doesnt work well with the increasing entropy of the universe, and the evidence for it is even less credible than the rest ... But prove to me god's not just hiding...

Thats where i'm at right now. I would appreciate any input, even religious propaganda. I want to know the truth, even if it means the complete destruction of my current schema for faith.

I would even go so far as to recommend two such books, The Case for Christ and The Case for Faith, to anyone who is openminded enough to consider Christianity. I almost bought into it after reading those, but to me, there are still holes (i'll probably talk about those later) If your already Christian, they will strengthen your faith, and if not, they will rock your world...

[Tribune7]

Except there is actual evidence for the Big Bang

Where did the energy in the Big Bang come from?

and absolutely none for an afterlife.

Which means its a matter of faith.

[Skywalk]

Krishna?
Osiris?
Odin?
Mithras?

[Quix]

Given my research in the broad field of values . . . and that a chunk of it compared atheists and agnostics to pentecostals and charismatics as well as to non-pent/char evangelicals and non-evangelicals . . .

I collected information from all the leading atheist organizations I could get a response from.

I was reading through the major publication--THE ATHEIST or whatever it was/is called . . .

and I was shocked.

With just the few minor changes of some key words and phrases, the whole publication would have read exactly like that coming out of a traditional Pentecostal denominational headquarters. It was incredible. I was totally amazed at this unexpected phenomenon.

But, as a lot of research has shown, many things are like a horseshoe--the end extremes are closer together in many respects than they are to the middle.

And, hate is not the opposite of love, apathy is.

In short, certainly ATHEISM is a fierce religion on the part of many of those professing it--particularly those gatekeeping on publishing many "scientific" journals.

[balrog666]

Which means its a matter of faith.

Which puts on a par with the Invisible Pink Unicorn and so is utterly dismissible.

[seowulf]

Religions aspouse the belief in God(s). Atheists don't believe in God(s). So to answer your question, no it is not a religion.

---

Atheism (at least the rabid version) would seem to meet definitions 3 and 4 for religion.

re·li·gion [ri líjj?n] (plural re·li·gions) noun
1.RELIGION beliefs and worship: people’s beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life
2.RELIGION particular system: a particular institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine
3.personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by
4.obsession: an object, practice, cause, or activity that somebody is completely devoted to or obsessed by
•The danger is that you start to make fitness a religion.
5.CHRISTIANITY monk’s or nun’s life: life as a monk or a nun, especially in the Roman Catholic Church

[12th century. Via Anglo-Norman religiun, from Old French religion, from the Latin stem religion-, “obligation, reverence,” of uncertain origin: probably formed from religare, (see RELY).]

[Tribune7]

Which puts on a par with the Invisible Pink Unicorn and so is utterly dismissible.

You mean death?

[Tribune7]

A very interesting and related thread.

[balrog666]

It's amazing the way you can misinterpret the simplest things - such willful blindness is not only foolish but hazardous.

Let me quote Crichton from the other thread:

Most of us have had some experience interacting with religious fundamentalists, and we understand that one of the problems with fundamentalists is that they have no perspective on themselves. They never recognize that their way of thinking is just one of many other possible ways of thinking, which may be equally useful or good. On the contrary, they believe their way is the right way, everyone else is wrong; they are in the business of salvation, and they want to help you to see things the right way. They want to help you be saved. They are totally rigid and totally uninterested in opposing points of view. In our modern complex world, fundamentalism is dangerous because of its rigidity and its imperviousness to other ideas.

He might as well have been talking specifically about you and a couple of others here.

[Tribune7]

It's amazing the way you can misinterpret the simplest things - such willful blindness is not only foolish but hazardous.

You say atheism is not a faith. I say it is because it requires a belief in unprovable things such as what occurs after death. You bring in something about unicorns.

What am I misinterpreting?

[jwalsh07]

Don't assume any such thing.

OK, no problem, no more assumptions but I have concluded that you're a sophist based on your postings.

As far as I'm concerned, you're trying to prove that you shouldn't have to prove anything. If you are trying to use logic to destroy the efficacy of logic, you've destroyed that upon which your argument is based.

LOL, getting a bit to deep for my blue collar mind to wrap my arms around.

I also gather that you think that if you can establish that something can't be proven, then it must be disproven or it must be accepted. Again, if you do that you destroy the basis on which you later intend to rest your argument.

Nice lecture but I remain unimpressed.

Science tells me that the first two laws of thermodynamics are indeed laws and immutable. Science also tells me that effects must have causes. The universe is an effect and so there must be a cause.

Moreover, the available science indicates that at some time t=o, the laws of physics and TD and all the matter that was and will be, absent another creation, came into being resulting in an expanding universe which is the effect.

So logically, my mind looks at what the scientists tells me and I can only conclude that something was the cause that resulted in that effect. It is illogical to think otherwise and irrational to rule out a Creator when you can observe that creation in all its wonder all around you.

Now please, no more lectures in Logic 101, it makes my brain hurt.

[Roughneck]

Everyone who fears the punishment of God feels the same way as you do...pity.

[Roughneck]

>>>To believe that there is a higher force/power/God is a choice most people make without analysis<<<<

God encourages analyisis. Most true christains HAVE analized their beliefs, that is why so many encourage others to join the faith..Blessed are those who believe without seeeing.

[Roughneck]

Mineral Man,

I will see you as I sit at Gods table - and you will see me as well. You will be forced to recognize God, you will be forced to recognize me as one of His beloved. No matter what your haughty attitude is here in the secular world, no matter how superior you feel to those of faith..you will someday cry for the mercy of God - I pray you will not be denied.

I pray for you, and have since the last time we posted on this forum.

[Roughneck]

And since those Sumerians believed in Gods that were seperate and distict from the one in which you believe, you still have to present evidence to support YOUR god.


There are plenty of Gods. Why else would the christian God say "Have no other God before Me" ?

The God of christians, (whether or not He is called by another name by others) is the God of Abraham, Issac and Joseph. Christians are called to worship AS THEY BELIEVE. Jews are called worship AS THEY BELIEVE...as they believe in their God, as God has been revealed to each of them.

Atheists have no God, no belief in a God ...they are dooomed because they do not believe in God in any form, any revelation...

[Roughneck]

There are "saintly" atheists and there are evil atheists. There are saintly Christians( and Jews and Hindus and buddhists) and there are evil Christians( and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists)


No such thing as an evil christian or jew. If they are evil, they only PRETEND to be christian or jew...

[cornelis]

There is some theology out there that allows for the capacity for christians or jews to commit evil acts. It's an important point and wise to admit that a serious theology will recognize that perfection is not an option.

[#3Fan]

Do not associate this with hostility, but could you cite your empiracle source for the gorrila claim?

A TV show about 15 years ago. If you don't want to believe it, fine with me.

I've never heard such a claim, but I have heard similar claims made which are later completely disproven. One example of such a claim is chimp altruism by Carl Sagan in "Shadows of the Forgotten Ancestors." In fact this was disproven by Dr. Ian Gilby's study of meat sharing as a hedonistic/selfish attempt to pacify beggers.

I've never looked at that.

[#3Fan]

Universities are not pulpits.

They sure sound like pulpits to me.

I would hope that most students are objective enough to make their own decisions.

Many are fooled.