Freedom From Atheism

I'm an atheist and I have no wish to have you be in fear; just the opposite. I think that faith based and superstitious thinking is rooted in fear and generates fear. I'm interested in love, real love. And truth; and if that means arguing with you over the delicate assumptions you've made about the universe then so be it.

 

superstitious? truth? thats quite a claim and no supporting evidence. which universe are you arguing about?

 

that is absolutely not true, just like you can call this a democracy till hell freezes over and its not even close to a democracy. People seem to believe it must have some religious label to establish itself as a religion, not so, it only needs to get caught with its fingers in the cookie jar and rule against a religious principle and then enforce its ruling. It has now established itself as a religion in opposition to someone elses religion. Check out the mormons and bigamy laws. The only question that remains is which religion....'atheism'.

They were not trying to get away from that system they were trying to get away from being under the ruling powers system. This happened much later when the states started declaring state religions.

 

No one has debunked anything of the sort, but I will certainly review anything you wish to quote and prove it.

 

Not a word of that makes any sense.

 

:rofl:

 

This universe; the only one we know anything about. There is no evidence that the abrahamic religions are true. None whatsoever. That's not a bold claim I'm making; that is the understood state of affairs even amongst many believers. Hence "faith", or pretending to know something that you don't know. And why would we pretend like that? Because we are afraid. Afraid of not having any answers, afraid of answers that are scary.

 

The universe? We arent talking about cosmology, and that is not the topic under discussion. pretty difficult to accept they are not true when material evidence contradicts your claim.








You are misapplying faith as well, as the previous poster said.

You have faith as well, despite you would deny it. You have faith that in science, that the sun will rise tomorrow for example, but is that true? Of course not. You have faith that a bridge will hold you when you cross it. This is all easily seen tangible 'faith'. Not all faith is easily seen and your claim that faith in the fruits of a deity based religion is merely a pretense of knowledge is absurd and the same can be said for any atheist, who pretends God does not exist. That path you chose to argue is dead end and leads to nowhere just like 'your opinion' that religion theistic or nontheistic has anything what so ever to do with fear.

 

Keep in mind neither you nor any other atheist have offered so much as a reasonable premise that it is not.

The usual premise offered is that atheists are 'lackers'.

That atheists 'lack' belief in a 'deity' and even if they want to hide under that strange form of illogical psuedo philosophical sophistry as that, it still makes no difference because its fact that nontheist religions exist as 'religions' since nontheist religions also 'lack' belief in a deity and as said they exist as religions.

Yep until atheists can come up with one hell of a lot better argument than they present proffer which I do not see forthcoming, atheism is an ipso facto religion.

What surprises me is that atheists do not see that?

 

ok no claim of atheist, check.

we all know there are different definitions of religion, but only one that is 100% universal therefore applicable to this discussion. its not me who has chosen the most limited narrow requirements for the definition of religion its the atheists. (and even that argument does nothing to further their cause)


So first you claim you are not an atheist then you claim there are numerous things 'we' meaning 'you' plus others do not believe in in your pro atheist argument. :yikes: whats that all about?

In order to not believe in one thing one must believe something else. Its a double headed coin.

 

the 'elements' of the definition I have stated many times previously created the conclusion. So you are wrong there is no circular reasoning in any context.

Yes when you restate the atheist position (premise argument et al) to justify it while claiming my position is circular on an incorrect basis you made a pro atheist argument.

You proved my point, thanks! I 'BELIEVE' atheism is a religion (actually I have proven it) just like I 'believe' the sun is hotter than hell both because of the associated elements.

Anything you can claim to 'DISbelieve' I can claim to 'believe' in its opposite. Thats why the atheist argument is laughably ridiculous on its face and no one has been able to rationally refute my position.

The worst and most telling part of your argument is that you disbelieve in the easter bunny and the irony is that deity based and other nontheist religions 'believe' there is no easter bunny nor do any of them believe there is an easter elephant, and the real kicker is that there is no such thing as an easter bunny religion!

I cant imagine what you intended to show us by that one aside from merely a pejorative comparison that has no valid connection to the topic?

Atheists 'believe' the only objective reality exists strictly in the material world.

 

If you search for 'religion define' on Google this comes up:

noun

1. 
   
   
   
   the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
   "ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
   synonyms: faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology; More
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   a particular system of faith and worship.
   plural noun: religions
   "the world's great religions"
   
   
   • 
     
     
     a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.
     "consumerism is the new religion"
     
     I don't think atheism would come under the first 2 definitions.
     
     It could come under number 3 - but it seems to me that the definition given is itself a derivative of the original meaning.
     
     IMO atheism is no more a religion than science, philosophy, art or many other things.
     
     For clarity's sake I'd better state that I am not an atheist.
     
     
     
     
     
   
   
   
   

 

depending on circumstances it could come under any one of them except [mainstream] deity based religion. You realize that definition has been repeated, posted and argued countless times in the thread. may want to go back and review them.

 

I see little point. It's just a game of definitions. Some will say atheism is a religion, other will differ. Neither side is likely to budge a single inch.

 

well its nontheistic religion, most philosophers conclude the same.

some people however are offended to hear it is a religion and the first thing they do is argue its not a religion which is a side argument to the main theme of the thread which is freedom from atheists.

 

So if faith is as you say, it can be faith in science, faith that the sun will rise in the morning...then are all people who believe the sun will rise in the morning technically part of a religion? It seems to me that if we're going to start saying that any group of people who hold a particular belief about the world without evidence belong to a religion, a whole lot of new religions are going to start popping up. I believe a lot of people are going to drive to work on Monday -- am I religious?