Could Atheism be technically considered a religion?

page: 26
15
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
We need to just make this topic taboo. It brings out the worst in people.

I say 404 any atheist/theist threads!

Kinda like we do any and all threads about that one plant.


What the whole of the internet should be discussing right now is whats going on in Dubai at the International telecommunication Regulation Conference.

The very future of information is being discussed by the UN (hate em). We are very close to not being able to have access to none-filtered unbiased information. Could very well be the beginning of global governance as well.
edit on 5-12-2012 by PassiveObserver because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by PassiveObserver
 


While I agree people should be alert to the conference, not enough people are going to be motivated one way or the other in order to do anything about it. We live in a world of sheep that do what they're told as long as they have toys to distract themselves with. (fast food, internet (even if it's restrictive), video games, celebrity gossip, etc etc). The elite will do what they want regardless of us.

Only when it all falls apart (which it will), will people fight for what they want, and only then will they get it. They'll only be able to keep it as long as they remain vigilant (and we've seen how non-vigilant we really are already). Mankind as terminal ADHD (Oh look! A shiny object!), and that, unfortunately will never change.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by scmoG
reply to post by ProfessorChaos
 


Atheism is undoubtedly the religion that denies religion and oddly enough, when I compared atheism to religion, a couple of atheists CONFIRMED that it is. No Christian has seen the beginning. No atheist has seen the beginning. Both rely on writings and theologies that claim certain beliefs. Christians have preachers and atheists have scientists. Atheists think science is truth, although it is only mere opinion of man. HOWEVER, the final nail in the coffin that IS ATHEISM, is that atheism DENIES meaning and purpose. Thus, truth and lies do not exist. Everything is an accident, even our thoughts. If atheists can see their brightly held hypocrisy, they would see that what they believe does not exist, nor has meaning, but they LOVE mocking God don't they? I want to meet an atheist, that will after the murder of their family, losing their house, car and job, say "Oh, it doesn't matter, because nothing exists nor has purpose." They won't. *gasp* WHY DO ATHEISTS BELIEVE IN CONSPIRACIES?! WHY ARE THEY ON THIS SITE? THE ELITE AND NWO DON'T EXIST! OH MAH BRAIN IS SPLODIN! Oh yeah, how will you atheist's feel, when you fulfill your role, by aiding in the murders of God's true people? At that point, will you look upon yourselves and see the monsters that they have made you? Honestly, I don't think so. You see, atheist's already harbor hate for God's people and God Himself, so within these next several months, the SPIRITUAL push will be given and laws will be deduced, that will allow pure atheism to run amok upon the world and at THAT point.....
edit on 4-12-2012 by scmoG because: (no reason given)


Wow, and that's all down to atheism huh!

Y'see when I look towards the east, i see a variety of religions bickering among themselves, funny that.

Also funny that whenever a terrorist atrocity is committed, always seems to be religion against religion.

Yeah, i see what you're saying there.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfessorChaos
 


It's truly sad isn't it.

Sometimes I wish I could be one of the happy idiots. I am a lover of people. One of the things I enjoy most is sitting at a busy mall, and just watching people be people.

We are beautiful, and terrible things. Infinitely creative yet infinitely destructive. I don't understand what is wrong with me sometimes.

Ignorance is bliss I guess.
edit on 5-12-2012 by PassiveObserver because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Telling an atheist that it's a religion is like telling a christian that Christ is evil. It goes against their fundamental beliefs.

For a christian, the core of his faith is Christ, and anything that goes against that will be subject to at its best denial and at its worst violence. Christ is the representation of good, hope, love and so on, and if you say that Christ is evil, you are saying something that goes against the exact definition of what they believe they stand for, so obviously they'll reject the idea.

For an atheist, the core of his faith is rationality. They believe so strongly that they are being rational, that anything that goes against that will be subject to, again, at its best denial and at its worst violence. For them religion is defined as the main evil of the world because of its superstition. Telling an atheist that atheism can fall in the category of religion, is basically telling them that they are irrational or superstitious. It's the exact opposite of what they believe they stand for and therefore they'll obviously reject the idea.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
If Atheists where truly rational, and had a basic understanding of quantum physics, they would be able to rationalize the fact that past what we can sense in our little 3D existence there is plenty of room for a creating deity.

Or not. there is no way to know. That's why this is a none issue, and people who pick sides are ignorant.

Science says 73% of universal mass is "Dark Energy" that's pretty much a term for "We have no f**king idea".

Science can only explain so much.


edit on 5-12-2012 by PassiveObserver because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-12-2012 by PassiveObserver because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   
well i think the concept of worshipping man and only man, is
faulty. and that's what atheism wants. several empires have had the same focus-- worship the human figure head to your own detriment. stalin had people literally, worshipping him, often to their own demise.

the figurehead then believes and tries to convince others around him/her to believe, that he is divine and everyone else is there for the sole purpose of serving him/her. this would be true if all life was, was a video game you created and modified to your liking. however, since you can't prove that the other individual players in your game are not also real and therefore dont deserve to be, and shouldn't be, treated as just a figment of your imagination to toss out when you grow weary of them, to suggest there's sufficient proof to treat them so, is insane. i realize that's deep, but that's what is required to follow the concept of worshipping man to the degree required with atheism. everybody just becomes expendable assests of some ego maniac.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by vasaga
I'm used to my posts being dismissed. ...


I don't have a problem with your posts, they're quite reasonable.
But you've got to admit, lucid's response was a good point.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
well i think the concept of worshipping man and only man, is
faulty. and that's what atheism wants.


I don't think so... maybe some who are atheist have that philosophy though.
I think it can be agreed that mankind is capable of coming up with dangerous and destructive philosophies within religion as well as outside of it.
For anyone to claim only religion leads down these roads is wrong - an atheist who insists on this point is doing the name a disservice.
edit on 5-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by StalkerSolent
Also, if morality "our urge to provide the best circumstances for our success as a species," isn't it a bit of a handicap? Perhaps I'm thinking in purely Darwinistic terms, but if one accepts an evolutionary paradigm, doesn't it seem we are stymying our progress as a species by having some sort of system (morals) that encourages us to protect the weak?

I think compassion and protection of the weak (a highly interpretive term) does contribute overall to our success as a species, certainly our quality of life.
Depends what the definition of 'success' is really.


Originally posted by StalkerSolent
I'm not sure if you've read Crime and Punishment but the villain in the story, Svidrigaïlov, rejects societal norms and morals. As a result, he's completely unshackled--I would almost use the term enlightened.


Wow I really have to read Dostoyevsky. I got an overview of his work through reading Colin Wilson's The Outsider, which was an examination of how literature has dealt with the outsider's existential questions (to simplify it slightly).
edit on 5-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by delusion

Originally posted by undo
well i think the concept of worshipping man and only man, is
faulty. and that's what atheism wants.


I don't think so... maybe some who are atheist have that philosophy though.
I think it can be agreed that mankind is capable of coming up with dangerous and destructive philosophies within religion as well as outside of it.
For anyone to claim only religion leads down these roads is wrong - an atheist who insists on this point is doing the name a disservice.
edit on 5-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)


no the difference is, you are, or should be, free to have WORTH beyond the chunk of flesh your conscience/spirit/etc, is attached to and requires others to honor your right to that value since its yours not theirs. what some atheists did, to circumvent the kind of mental and physical tyranny of being forced to worship men, such as some of the signers of the declaration of independence, was assign value to your flesh but left out the acknowledgement of the you that is more than flesh.

if you are told and believe and thus ruled by someone who thinks the same way, your life is a meaningless series of electrical and chemical reactions, you are then entirely expendable in the service of whoever has the biggest guns, the most money or the best snowjob.
edit on 5-12-2012 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   
p.s. by value i mean, your body and mind, soul, spirit, conscience, is sovereign. everyone's is. but according to atheism, you are the result of evolution so at any point, you may be weeded out for the benefit of the species and these are decisions made by men who have egos the size of the local galactic cluster. which not only circumvents your sovereignty as a sentient life form of potentially, various interdimensional functions, but also your sovereignty as a 3d flesh citizen of the planet.

people need to admit, that the most vicious survivalists rise to the top, and that means if you give them free, no holds bar rule over you since you're nothing but a blob of flesh meant to serve them, they will take it gladly and follow it up with ever increasing insane reasons to kill people.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



Go ahead and debate if if you want. The answer has already been provided however.

And no, the link I posted is not a "joke"

as evidenced [url=http://www.facebook.com/pages/First-Church-of-Atheism/7712156427]> HERE WEBSITE the face of Religious Atheism



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by RoguePenguinScotland
 



Technically you can't call atheism a religion, as that would go against the whole purpose of inventing the English language.
All that you can say is that both sides can have similar dogmas.


Try to be as objective as possible.

Outline how atheism has a dogma similar to religion.


As far as me being objective attempting to clear up who is right and wrong, that's not gonna happen.

All i see is that both sides put all their chips into a belief system one way or another because it works for them.
From my perspective, i have always been strangely comfortable not knowing all the answers.

I mean who am i really on a universal scale to say there is no god. Look at the diversity and complexity all around you. If you wan't to chalk all that up to random chance and it works for you then great, but i would like to keep a more open mind to the infinite possibilities of the cosmos.
I don't feel the need to tag myself with a label one way or another (Atheist/Theist) I'm just a cosmic Schmuck and i enjoy looking for answers and wondering at the beauty all around us.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by HIWATT
 


Okay. You posted your end thread proof. We get it, Why do you keep bringing that up?


ahead and debate if if you want. The answer has already been provided however.


As was pointed out, you were not the first to provide that link in this thread...




I don't see anything on their > WEBSITE < indicating it's a "joke" of any kind


You never responded to my post to you...so did you read the FAQ on that site? Joke perhaps isn't the correct word, but it's not an attempt to make atheism a religion. It's purely so atheists can get ordained for completely non-denominational weddings. *which they joke about in the FAQ*



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by RoguePenguinScotland
 



As far as me being objective attempting to clear up who is right and wrong, that's not gonna happen.

I never asked that of you. I asked you to back up your claim that atheism has dogma similar to atheism by outlining how. That's all. I assumed you had a response since it was your point



All i see is that both sides put all their chips into a belief system one way or another because it works for them.

Depends on the atheist.

Many atheists are so purely because of the lack of evidence to support God's existence. If compelling enough evidence was presented they would change their minds.

Whereas, the religious have faith... the changing of evidence matters not.

I would say for the most part the religious put their chips in a lockbox.


From my perspective, i have always been strangely comfortable not knowing all the answers.

I really want to know the answers, but that doesn't make me very comfortable
It's taxing that's for sure.


I mean who am i really on a universal scale to say there is no god. Look at the diversity and complexity all around you. If you wan't to chalk all that up to random chance and it works for you then great

I don't believe in random chance on the grand grand scale. I don't really wanna discuss it here as it's off topic, just responding since you addressed me.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by HIWATT
 


I never said that you website was a joke. I said it was made in the spirit of sarcasm:


sar·casm
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2. a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.


Do you see the irony?



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by delusion

I think compassion and protection of the weak (a highly interpretive term) does contribute overall to our success as a species, certainly our quality of life.
Depends what the definition of 'success' is really.

Wow I really have to read Dostoyevsky. I got an overview of his work through reading Colin Wilson's The Outsider, which was an examination of how literature has dealt with the outsider's existential questions (to simplify it slightly).
edit on 5-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)


Well, I suppose that's debatable. It does seem to fly in the face of Darwinian logic IMHO, but it also seems humans are something more than animal...doesn't it?

What's not debatable is that you ought to read Crime and Punishment. It's a fantastic book!



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Atheism is not believing in deity’s you do not have to believe in big bang or evolution to be an atheist how is that a religion?



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
...
but left out the acknowledgement of the you that is more than flesh.


Just to address this and (I think) your concerns around it -
I think 'the you that is more than flesh' is just an illusion that comes with being a self-reflecting being, and one that will end when we do.
I see it as an illusion I can rid myself of and be none the worse off for having done so. I don't feel like becoming a psycopath.
Obviously you don't think this, and I don't need to convince you or anything, but it doesn't follow that your life would be of any less worth if you did think this.
Yet it is claimed so often by those who believe in a soul, that without it, we're reduced in some way, and we'll all just revert immediately to being psycopaths because an idea we have got meaning from has gone.
But who's to say you won't find meaning in more immediate and real things?
When an illusion that gives comfort is lost, there is a process of adaptation and possible angst, but this goes away and we still manage to find joy and meaning when we focus on what's real and in front of us.

I should also state that IMO mysticism (by which I mean some sort of personal relationship with the all) is still compatible with not believing in a soul or essence of self that survives death. (Look to zen buddhism, 'being in the now', present-awareness exercises, even a good science documentary that shows us how connected everything is, etc.)

So the scenario you fear coming to pass...


Originally posted by undo
if you are told and believe and thus ruled by someone who thinks the same way, your life is a meaningless series of electrical and chemical reactions, you are then entirely expendable in the service of whoever has the biggest guns, the most money or the best snowjob.


rests on assumptions that are not part of the experience of those that are already on this side of belief.

Perhaps your fear is more based on a whole society that is FORCED to think this way, and I can't ever see that happening in a sane world* - I think people should still be free to have any beliefs that give them meaning, just as long as they aren't harmful. We could lose some aspects of religion that can encourage harm and still not lose the core purpose that gives comfort to the many.
In no way is atheism for everyone, and atheists that do think this are just probably going through some 'stuff'.
edit on 6-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)


*edit, okay communist countries I guess but I don't know if it's fair to say the main cause of the institutionalised sociopathy was due to atheism. They were just hard-core fanatics which is not realy compatible with the healthy running of a society.
And Stalin really was a psychopath. I don't know what sort of things he believed in.
edit on 6-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)
edit on 6-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
15
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join