Atheism as a religion

[amortalman]

The following excerpt is from the National Catholic Register, www.ncregister.com :

But the truth is, atheism is the farthest thing in the world from simple absence of belief. Indeed, atheism is a whole system of beliefs—a system that has its own philosophy (materialism), morality (relativism), politics (social Darwinism), and culture (secularism). It even has its own sacraments (abortion and euthanasia). And this system of beliefs has been responsible for more death, carnage, persecution and misery than any system of beliefs the world has ever known.

Topic of debate: Do you agree or disagree with the statement above and why.

Edit Note: The web address for the National Catholic Register is incomplete. The article I referenced can be read at http://www.ncregister.com/blog/guest-bl ... is-atheism

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 1 by amortalman]

Atheism is clearly not a religion. Let's refer once again to atheists to understand this reality. Per the Atheist Alliance International:


"Is atheism a religion?

Let’s spell this out, atheists have no beliefs in common, no gods of any kind, nothing they worship, no scripture, no shared values, and no dogma. They have no clergy, no schools, and no sacred buildings. The only thing all atheists share is a lack of belief in gods.

Why then do the religious so often claim atheism is a religion? We don’t know, you’ll have to ask religious people that question. Perhaps it is an attempt to drag atheism down to the level of a religion—a set of unsubstantiated beliefs, in a landscape where beliefs are held only on faith. If so, they would be completely wrong about that too."

https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-a ... -religion/

[OnceConvinced]

The following excerpt is from the National Catholic Register, www.ncregister.com :

But the truth is, atheism is the farthest thing in the world from simple absence of belief. Indeed, atheism is a whole system of beliefs—a system that has its own philosophy (materialism), morality (relativism), politics (social Darwinism), and culture (secularism). It even has its own sacraments (abortion and euthanasia). And this system of beliefs has been responsible for more death, carnage, persecution and misery than any system of beliefs the world has ever known.

Topic of debate: Do you agree or disagree with the statement above and why.

Edit Note: The web address for the National Catholic Register is incomplete. The article I referenced can be read at http://www.ncregister.com/blog/guest-bl ... is-atheism

It's nonsense and I'll take all the things above and point out why:

philosophy

There are no philosophies that atheists are expected to follow or believe, unlike with normal religion.

morality

There is no list of morals that an atheist is expected to hold, unlike with normal religion.

politics

There are no political beliefs that Atheists are supposed to hold and there are no atheist parties that I am aware of, unlike when it comes to say Christians. There is no expectation that when voting you should vote for atheists.

culture

There are no standard etiquette or rules that atheists are expected to follow. Their culture generally comes from where they live and what they have grown up with. This may include religious aspects due to what family members do. eg, when I go to a family get together, someone always has to pray before we eat.


It even has its own sacraments (abortion and euthanasia).

No atheist is expected to do any of those things.


And this system of beliefs has been responsible for more death, carnage, persecution and misery than any system of beliefs the world has ever known.

I don't see that at all. In fact it seems religion is more responsible for those things. IN fact we see that atheists countries are far more peaceful and pleasant to live than religious countries.

It's besides the point though. There are no instructions for Atheists to cause any suffering unlike with a lot of religious texts that command people to be killed for certain so called sins.

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 1 by amortalman]

Atheism is clearly not a religion. Let's refer once again to atheists to understand this reality. Per the Atheist Alliance International:


"Is atheism a religion?

Let’s spell this out, atheists have no beliefs in common, no gods of any kind, nothing they worship, no scripture, no shared values, and no dogma. They have no clergy, no schools, and no sacred buildings. The only thing all atheists share is a lack of belief in gods.

Why then do the religious so often claim atheism is a religion? We don’t know, you’ll have to ask religious people that question. Perhaps it is an attempt to drag atheism down to the level of a religion—a set of unsubstantiated beliefs, in a landscape where beliefs are held only on faith. If so, they would be completely wrong about that too."

https://www.atheistalliance.org/about-a ... -religion/

You raise very valid points here. It's as if they see atheism as higher than them and they want to drag it down to their level.

Or is it the opposite? They want to bring Atheism up to be on par with them?

The bible says:
James 1:27: Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

So Christians are attempting to put atheism on par with this scripture. I guess we should feel flattered by this.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 30 by EarthScienceguy]

I probably would not reject a lot of the morality that an atheist would put forward, because to have a stable society certain moralities have to exist.

Oh? So if I as an atheist put forth certain moral ideas/principles, you wouldn't reject them right off the bat, simply for coming from an atheist?

The parts that I do not agree with I would say that the Bible condemns the practices that an atheist had put forward

And those would be...? Notice that I very deliberately have not yet actually given any detail on the morality I may or may not put forth.

Now what you said about man is true. Certain aspects of morality are subject to relativism.

So relativism is a criteria by which you reject a morality. Please divulge what you think relativism is, what constitutes it and give us an example.
Also then, afterward, (please afterward) explain how the Bible isn't an example of a relative morality, as DI claimed.

[amortalman]

Isn't a religion a faith system of beliefs? Atheist have faith, not in deities but I have never heard anywhere that a faith system must have deities but faith in something larger than themselves. Most atheist I talk to have faith in mankind's ability to save mankind from itself. I think one atheist put it, 'we got ourselves into this mess, we will get ourselves out'. That is a statement made in faith, so yes, atheism is a religion as a religion is defined as 'a particular system of faith'. Isn't their faith in the collective intelligence of humans which is bigger than themselves? It's very close to having faith Greek god Minerva but rather than having faith in one 'god' of wisdom it's a collective of humanity.

Your definition of religion is incomplete. Religious faith is attached to a diety and includes worship. Atheism doesn't fit the definition of religious faith.

Actually a religion doesn't have to have a deity. Just a belief system or dogma. A dogmatic belief there is no God is a belief system.

You're calling unbelief a belief which makes no sense. Unbelief is lack of belief. Websters defines it this way: Unbelief: incredulity or skepticism especially in matters of religious faith

Synonyms:
disbelief, incredulity
Antonyms:
belief, credence, credit

Atheism is a religion because atheist have faith there is no God.

No, atheists have a lack of faith in God. The American Atheists website put it this way:
"Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
"Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods."

It goes on to say "To put it in a more humorous way: If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby."

Scientologist call infinity god. Yet is infinity a god? Yet Scientology is called a religion.

Well, they refer to infinity as The Almighty. They call it a god and that's all they need to do to be defined as a religion. "Yet is infinity god?" I don't know and neither do you. Neither of us can disprove it.

Buddhism doesn't have a god or gods yet they are a religion.

Buddhists worship Buddha and Bodhisattvas. ( atheists do not worship anyone) They have temples (atheists have no temples or churches) in which they worship. http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions ... ip_1.shtml

Your definition of religion is just that, your definition and your statement "Religious faith is attached to a diety" is simply not true.

I beg to differ. The definition I gave is not mine but comes from the same source you supplied below (Merriam Webster):

Definition of religion:
1a : the state of a religious

b(1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural

(2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Depending on the atheist you talk to atheist glorify/praise themselves, mankind and/or a combo of many other things, that is worship.

Maybe some atheists do but I think they would be the exception. And you cannot call it worship because worship is defined as "the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity." And, "to show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites."

Some are even 'organized'. https://americanhumanist.org/ Did you catch that word? Organized.

So what? Casinos are also organized. Does that make them a religion?

Here is a mind blower for you, there is a large group that say they are spiritual but not religious.
So belief in a god but no religion or organization? That must really confuse your dogma of what a religion is defined as.

Didn't blow my mind in the least. Neither did it confuse me. What makes you think spiritual people believe in God? Many do not. And there are many so-called spiritual people who do believe in and worship God, These are religious people, the others are not.

There is more than one definition of religion. MW gives 4 different definitions. BTW to be defined as a religion it doesn't have to meet all 4 definitions.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

The number 4 definition from Merriam-webster is the only one that comes even close to supporting your argument but it also fails on the issue of faith.

[2timothy316]

The number 4 definition from Merriam-webster is the only one that comes even close to supporting your argument but it also fails on the issue of faith.

Faith doesn't have to be in a deity. You being an atheist, you still have faith or have full trust in something. All of mankind does it. Those that think they don't have faith in something, is what is called a delusion.

[2timothy316]

Actually a religion doesn't have to have a deity. Just a belief system or dogma. A dogmatic belief there is no God is a belief system.

You're calling unbelief a belief which makes no sense. Unbelief is lack of belief. Websters defines it this way: Unbelief: incredulity or skepticism especially in matters of religious faith

Synonyms:
disbelief, incredulity
Antonyms:
belief, credence, credit

The systematic way to reach the conclusion of unbelief is a religion. It's a dogma.

MW calls dogma "a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true"

Dogma synonyms: teaching, belief, tenet, principle, precept, maxim, article of faith, canon;

Do you not see the principles you believe that there is no God as having 'authority as incontrovertibly true'? Of course you do. That's the foundation for religion. Look at that, atheist fundamentalism.

I don't believe that the Earth is going to be destroyed. That is faith, so you can not believe something and it be faith. On the other hand, most atheist I know believe the Earth will be consumed by the Sun. So disbelief can indeed be a 'article of faith'. A dogma. Some think they are so different...it just more of the same.

[rikuoamero]

Actually a religion doesn't have to have a deity. Just a belief system or dogma. A dogmatic belief there is no God is a belief system.

You're calling unbelief a belief which makes no sense. Unbelief is lack of belief. Websters defines it this way: Unbelief: incredulity or skepticism especially in matters of religious faith

Synonyms:
disbelief, incredulity
Antonyms:
belief, credence, credit

The systematic way to reach the conclusion of unbelief is a religion. It's a dogma.

MW calls dogma "a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true"

Dogma synonyms: teaching, belief, tenet, principle, precept, maxim, article of faith, canon;

Do you not see the principles you believe that there is no God as having 'authority as incontrovertibly true'? Of course you do. That's the foundation for religion. Look at that, atheist fundamentalism.

For what you say to be true, there would have to be some group, organisation, some being or entity with power enforcing or dictating this dogma.
With a random atheist, someone lacks a belief in a God...who or what is this group/organisation?
Can you wrap your mind around the thought? I'll use the sports analogy - is a person who doesn't play tennis bound to [not] play by rules set forth by a non-tennis-playing group?
Compare this to the dogmas of actual religions. If a person who is a Christian who is a member of the Roman Catholic Church performs an abortion for example, promotes abortions, they are violating dogmas of the RCC and the Pope will excommunicate that person.
If I, an atheist, say X, what 'dogmas' of being an atheist am I violating? Will I be excommunicated from atheist groups for saying such? Notice that X there is deliberately undefined, because other than having a lack of a belief in a God or gods...there is nothing I can put in there as a hard core example, unlike what I did with the abortion and RCC just up above.
I am an atheist, I lack a belief in a God or gods, but this doesn't mean I take it as "incontrovertibly true". I could be convinced otherwise at some point in the future.

So...care to try again?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 37 by 2timothy316]

I don't believe that the Earth is going to be destroyed.

Why do you reject the scientific consensus with regards to stars, and what happens to them as they age? Do you reject supernovas happen?

That is faith, so you can not believe something and it be faith.

Is it the same kind of faith as what is promoted by Christianity, something to be lauded? If a Christian says to you he has faith, do you think better of him for doing so? Do you think better of an atheist if they should say "I have faith" or do you argue with them, think lesser of them?

On the other hand, most atheist I know believe the Earth will be consumed by the Sun. So disbelief can indeed be a 'article of faith'.

You're contradicting yourself. You just said most atheists you know BELIEVE...and then next sentence talk about DISbelief.
Which are you talking about? Belief or disbelief? Is "The earth will be consumed by the Sun" a belief of (most) atheists, or is it a disbelief?

A dogma. Some think they are so different...it just more of the same.

As in my previous response, is there some group demanding that this be true, that atheists believe it, that if atheists disagree with it, they are to be branded as heretics/kafir, that what the dogma is, is never to be questioned?
All I'm seeing is projection. I see within Christianity claims, dogmas, that Jesus Christ is the resurrected Son of God, for example, and this is not allowed to be questioned by those who belong to the group.

[rikuoamero]

The number 4 definition from Merriam-webster is the only one that comes even close to supporting your argument but it also fails on the issue of faith.

Faith doesn't have to be in a deity. You being an atheist, you still have faith or have full trust in something. All of mankind does it. Those that think they don't have faith in something, is what is called a delusion.

Incorrect. I don't have full trust that I'm not a brain in a vat. I don't have full trust in being able to defeat hard solipsism. However, in order to live and function within this world that I find myself in, I deliberately ignore those philosophical problems and continue on with my life.

2timothy, I recommend something to you.
Listen to atheists and take onboard what they say to you about themselves. You are doing what I have seen so many times from so many other theists, and only looking at atheists from the lens of your religion, which is not necessarily correct.
If you'd care to take a listen, here is something
https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/patr ... NWa_wD.mp3

It's the latest episode of Dogma Debate, with David C Smalley. In the episode, he talks to a Christian about atheism, about homosexuality. What really frustrated me, as a listener and former Christian, was the part where Smalley explains his past as a Christian, how he struggled to try to make sense of Christianity (I did too), really fought hard to keep his beliefs and faith...only for the caller, Rick, to immediately ignore and dismiss all that by insisting that Smalley didn't struggle, wanted to sin, is an agent of Satan and a liar.
And all because his religious holy book says those things about atheists.
Oh and the kicker? The caller Rick is a retired cop. If I had been on the show, I'd have demanded to know where his investigative skills were when talking to Smalley. Why believe all these things about Smalley and all before having talked to him?