It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could Atheism be technically considered a religion?

page: 14
15
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by wagnificent
 




No it's not. That's what a dogmatic person concludes. A logical person follows the rules of logic. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so a logical person would suspend judgement rather than jump to a hasty conclusion.


If you put it as a generality maybe you are right, even if I don't completely agree with you. But why go so wide when we talk here about a specific topic? God have certain characteristics, certain qualities, has a history, it is something defined quite well in the holy books. So the absence of those characteristics is enough to prove its falsity, don't you think so? I don't need to go into philosophical mode, is enough to prove that this world wasn't created as and when is stated in the bible, or that the God isn't all mighty, all knowing, and so forth, and I have enough to conclude that God is a false story.
Theoretically, anything can exists, and non-existence cannot be proved. But is much easier to prove the non-existence of something defined; you know where to look for it, and if it's not there... then it isn't.
edit on 3-12-2012 by WhiteHat because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
There is no reason to believe what an Atheist says

Why can't atheist's leave those people who believe in the creator alone?

What are they afraid of?.

The biggest problem with athesit's is they don't believe so no one else should, and get all "bent out of shape" when someone mentions god,says Merry Chistmas, or puts up a nativity scene thinking that "religiousness" might rub off on them like cooties.

The thing with all religions no one can force another to believe either a person does or they don't, and whether or not atheists like it or not "morality" has a basis in religion.

So yeah atheism is a religion that has a cult following that has flaws just as much as any other religion they all depend on those who follow them.
edit on 3-12-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Atheism = Non religious = no religion. Its a simple concept to grasp. If you are not something, you are not that something.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Reply to post by neo96
 


I don't know what they're afraid of, but it is quite annoying. Why every Atheist feels the burning need to tell everyone around them that they're atheist, and that religion is beneathe them.

I wish religious ppl and atheists alike could just leave their beliefs with themselves. Pushing your "holier than thou" is annoying and hypocritical, while at the same time, the atheists "Im too advanced for religion" is just as annoying.

Either celebrate Christmas and believe or do not. Just shut up about it.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by wagnificent

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope

How could one prove the 'non-existence' of 'something'? Something can not non-exist, for the moment it becomes something, or is considered something, implies its existence. Until God is proven to exist, there is no argument to be had. The proposition "God exists" is false. Can it be proven otherwise?


That's exactly the point. Non-existence cannot be observed, thus atheism is based on belief rather than knowledge...

If you read my previous posts, you would see that I am agnostic. I am not trying to assert that God does exist. I am trying to assert that atheism is dogmatic, not logical.


Atheism could be logical if it admitted that God does exist and to say what it really is—merely a word and idea. People pray and serve this idea. They have faith that the proposition "God exists" is true and base everything from morals to metaphysics on this one assumption. Despite the claim to atheism, the proposition "God does not exist" still requires a subject called God, implying existence. The claim of an agnostic—"no one can know if God exists or not"—still has God as the subject. These propositions are ideals; and the atheist, theist, and agnostic have faith in these ideals, and are dogmatic in their efforts to and promote them.

The real atheist will repudiate all ideals invented by other people in favour of his own—to be truly without the Gods of other men.



edit on 3-12-2012 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





The biggest problem with atheist's is they don't believe so no one else should, and get all "bent out of shape" when someone mentions god,says Merry Chistmas, or puts up a nativity scene thinking that "religiousness" might rub off on them like cooties.


Big problem. "Atheist" is not a group so "they" don't do anything.




The thing with all religions no one can force another to believe either a person does or they don't, and whether or not atheists like it or not "morality" has a basis in religion.


No, "religious morals" have a basis in social contracts, which is the basis for morality.




So yeah atheism is a religion that has a cult following that has flaws just as much as any other religion they all depend on those who follow them.


How can atheist have a "cult following" when there is, specifically, nothing to follow?



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


wiki.ironchariots.org...




If you truly believe that there is no god, how is that different from believing that there is a god?

Both are positions on a fundamentally religious question that must ultimately rest on faith. Therefore, atheism is just another form of religion.




Religion


As an uncountable noun, religion is a "way of living" or the set of customs or rituals that follows from such beliefs.


I believe it is a form of religion or at least a philosophy. My question to Atheist would be, where did we come from?
edit on 12/2/2012 by BrokenAngelWings33 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/3/2012 by BrokenAngelWings33 because: Edit



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   
If religious people are the equivelant of "stamp collectors", then Atheist people are the equivelant of "non-stamp collectors". You see?



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 




How can atheist have a "cult following" when there is, specifically, nothing to follow?


I found that is very hard, if not impossible for people who takes sides to imagine a neutral position. "If you don't believe in God, then in what you believe?" "Do I need to believe in something?" "What, you live just like that, without any belief?" "yep, just like that...."
It happened to me with almost everyone around me. Threads like this is a good example. If you have no belief, then your non-belief is a belief.
It amazes them a mind without belief, and it amaze me this need for a belief.

Middle way, people, is the best.
edit on 3-12-2012 by WhiteHat because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by BrokenAngelWings33
 





Both are positions on a fundamentally religious question that must ultimately rest on faith. Therefore, atheism is just another form of religion.


The only reason that this may be true is that the religious person says, "What do you think of my idea of a God?" And the atheist answers, "I haven't given the idea of god a thought, but it doesn't sound logical, so I reject your idea of god."

It's only religious because the religious put it in a religious context.



My question to Atheist would be, where did we come from?


Why is this a religious question?



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Sorry the only people who have a problem are atheists.

Yeah Yeah "there are no atheist groups"

www.google.com...:en-US
fficial&client=firefox-a



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Hmm... I'm going to say "not really", but generally because of the problem you'd run into calling monotheism, polytheism or even deism religions in their own right.

They are simply positions of belief in a deity or deities. And for the record, as a number of people have stated before, many atheists don't believe "God doesn't exist", they're just waiting for the jury to finish deliberating. This may never happen.

I technically am... erm... sort of an atheist, but it would take way too long to explain. Funnily enough, this supports the point I'm about to make.

Now that being said, atheists can definitely be religious... just not about atheism. The thing is, the only thing that ties them all together is the lack of belief. Some don't actually accept evolution. Others disagree with the Big Bang, some believe we were genetically engineered and others believe we're in a computer program.

So when we get to the bottom of it, the are no rituals or pillars of faith that tie all of them together. Now pigeonholing numbers of them into smaller groups that can act like rabid zealots? That's another conversation entirely, but possibly worth having.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


I identify with much of what you wrote jigger. I too am an atheist, but one never convinced about the validity of the so called "modern synthesis" of evolutionay theory.

What about the Cambrian Explosion? What about the avian lung, or bird wing? What about the undirected creation of complex systems such as the photosynthetic apparatus, or the electron transport chain? There is no evidence for any of this having occurred. It's not unreasonable to look for evidence of a mechanism that works through the accretion of many many many small purposeless changes and leads to the creation of a man from a once upon a time fish. But having a not wholly unreasonable theory upon which to work in one's search for support if not proof of same said theory, and having proven said theory to be in point of fact TRUE, are two very different things.

I differ with you though in my views about theists, having been a theist myself once upon a little boy's world view. I do not believe it is necessarily "arrogant" to believe oneself to be the creation of a God, and as you pointed out, this is what much of religion is about. This world, this universe , we ourselves, were made with intention and with purpose by an intelligent creator. You and I jigger were made with a furtherance of purpose in mind.

I say it is not necessarily arrogant to believe so because most people who subscribe to this notion of being made by an intelligent creator with furtherance of PURPOSE in mind were taught such to be the truth as little boys and little girls growing up. I went to Catholic grade school, my parents were Catholic. and believing in God and Christ was something I learned, perhaps in a different "sense" from how I learned 2+2=4, but I learned it in the same classroom context, with as much or more authority backing what at the time was a very evident truth. My parents believe this, know this to be TRUE, everybody around me does as well. They are powerful people with big buildings and what not supporting their professions of this and that to be so. But despite all that, by the time I was 15 , I was no longer a theist. God didn't make sense to me, big buildings and robes and other ostensible trappings of power aside.

I went to college and earned a MD/PhD. I have spent the last 30 years doing research on the HIV virus. Along the way, I have been exposed to every new and old theory of evolution and am utterly unconvinced that observed microevolutionary facts such as penicillin resistance, can be extrapolated and legitimately account for the proposed macroevolutionary changes documented by the fossil record.

Who made you and me? I don't believe it was God. But I also don't believe it was a million, million , million little PURPOSELESS AND UNDIRECTED point mutations that somehow took a fish and fashioned a man, not credible.

Because both religion and neoDarwinism directly address the world view problem, answer the exact same question, and beacause neoDarwinism is the atheism du jour, as a matter of fact, it is what our children learn in school about our origins, then of course this is "religion" in its most important and ONLY societary meaningful sense.
edit on 3-12-2012 by unconditionalsurrender because: changed God's and wrote "God" instead.

edit on 3-12-2012 by unconditionalsurrender because: wrote "unreasonable"

edit on 3-12-2012 by unconditionalsurrender because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-12-2012 by unconditionalsurrender because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Good question OP


I've often wondered that myself. A group of people that all follow the same beliefs and stand together as one, are they classed as following a religion? Hhmm, I'm not sure? Hardline Nazi's thought they were the perfect race and the world should of been their's, were they considered religious fanatics or were they nutters? I'm not saying atheists are mad by the way! Maybe religion is the wrong word to be using. Maybe if they lived their lives following their beliefs then I would agree but I don't think most of them do. Of all the people I've spoke to, most claim to be atheists but they use the term with a pinch of salt - in other words they don't believe in a god and have never really thought about how or why they're here. Most of them don't care to be honest. Should these people be labelled? Does everybody have to be labelled as something for society to accept them?
Myself, I don’t believe in a god and I sometimes find it difficult to believe in the theory of evolution because of some of the things I have read about it. Is it really possible that we evolved to be this exceptionally clever animal? Modified/engineered? Anyway that’s probably an argument for another day. What I’m trying to say is that I put my self in to the “still not made my mind up and probably never will, still confused camp,” and I wouldn’t say that was a religion so I don’t think atheists should be classed as one.

The term religion should stick with groups that follow a deity in my opinion. People that have the same set of beliefs but refute the existence of a higher power shouldn’t. Maybe a cult!



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by broddeb
 


"Cult" has a negative connotation, so not sure that is a fair term to use.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsLife
If religious people are the equivelant of "stamp collectors", then Atheist people are the equivelant of "non-stamp collectors". You see?


Apparently you haven't yet met the kind of atheists being refered to! Take a look around...

The ones that are actively against religion- they search out religious type forum boards, to argue with the religious.
They attack and harrass them in public, they bring up their disdain and opinion about religion at dinner parties, they loudly express the opinion that anyone with any kind of spiritual faith, is "bad", evil, and must be eliminated from the society.
They attempt to convert the minds of believers, and manipulate the agnostics to join their cause, through verbal bullying and insults.
They claim superiority in mental, emotional, and ethical matters.

No, all atheists are not like that, but those are the ones that "believers" mostly come into contact with, and are often their example of what an atheist is.

So ... find me some people who do all that towards stamp collectors and stamp collecting?
edit on 3-12-2012 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Sorry the only people who have a problem are atheists.

Yeah Yeah "there are no atheist groups"

www.google.com...:en-US
fficial&client=firefox-a


Sorry, still no. I didn't say there was no "Atheist groups" I said " that there is no atheist group". As in "Atheism" has no organized dogma or place of worship.

I guess by your(quite idiotic) argument that the smoking section at a hospital would be considered a religious organization.

There are "groups" for everything you can imagine, that doesn't mean that if you knit sweaters you become a part of the knitters group.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Atheists, for the most part, seem to believe in a materialistic view of reality. They believe it is the only logical view of reality. Very intelligent philosophers, mathematicians, and logicians have disagreed (Idealism). Materialistic atheists are following a specific philosophy/religion depending on how you define those terms. I would say an agnostic is closer to not having a religion than an atheist.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Another_Nut
 





The universe isn't fine-tuned with the intent on growing life, but life grew because the conditions were fine tuned.


You have no idea how many times I've wanted to write that, but didn't think anyone would understand it.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by scrounger
reply to post by jiggerj
 


I am sorry but the debate of atheism being a religion being based on ego is at best comical at worst irrelivant.

One just look at the court cases filled by that famous atheist and big ego takes on a WHOLE NEW LEVEL.

As for ego in general being a deciding factor then every football fan who is a overt fan is a considered a church on themselves.

The church of DA BEARS for example.

So ego just plays into if that practiciner of atheism/christianity/the great spagetti monster/evolution is an obnoxious jerk or or not.

But not a factor in if something is or is not a religion.



Wow, I think you just proved my case. The way many people go nuts over football (and other sports) is at best, an ego thing. People live in Boston, so they are loyal to the Red Sox. What are the Red Sox? It's a team made up of players NOT from Boston or even New England! The only thing Boston about the Boston Red Sox is that the team is located here. And yet, the diehard spectators HATE players on other teams, such as the Yankees. This is ridiculous! All of this over a game where somebody tries to hit a round object with a stick! The game is meaningless, and yet people have died over sports!

Ego. My team is better than your team.

Religion: My god is the right god. YOURS is the wrong god!
WE are special.
God created the whole universe just for us!

Gimme a break!
edit on 12/3/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join