Is atheism a religion

  • Thread starter Thread starter someperson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is by far the silliest trope ever. Why not an empty “worship slot”? Worship is not a need.
Human nature. Just look at rise of totalitarianism coincident will fall of religion in past 200 years, resulting in 150,00,000+ deaths. Facts are facts.
 
Human nature. Just look at rise of totalitarianism coincident will fall of religion in past 200 years, resulting in 150,00,000+ deaths. Facts are facts.
That’s an argument of governance not religion. In most those examples totalitarian regimes view religion as a usurper of power as it was the basis of power at one time. On the other hand look at various European countries that effectively have secular governments and to large degrees, populations.
 
Atheists are just people who don’t believe in any God. Catholics are people who don’t believe in nearly all Gods. But they believe in one and that makes them a religion. Atheism, stated differently, is the absence of any religious belief. It might be possible to be an atheist and believe in spirits who are not God, and other spiritual forces but most atheists in my experience reject those ideas too, and would not, say, consider Buddhists atheists despite their lack of a personal deity. In my experience atheists who can be bothered listening to what religious people think about us are mildly annoyed by efforts to present atheism itself as a religion. Most of us are open to seeing religious aspects to some forms of organised atheism, just as we can see religious parallels with tropical fish organisations. People get together and do things in similar ways whatever the cause. It is because we are social animals, evolved to do so.
 
Well, atheism isn’t an attempt to rebind the man with God, so it’s not a religion. But it behaves like a cult very often.
 
That’s an argument of governance not religion
Government is the deity of Atheism so it is an argument of religion. The fact that the political leaders of regimes are held out as Gods while the people are forbidden from practicing religion (eg. North Korea) proves the point.
 
Government is the deity of Atheism so it is an argument of religion.
And with that there’s no where for our conversation to go. I do not consider any government a god. I suspect most atheists say the same.
Yes, some do (or face death) but that is not how I or many others regard gov.

This is like when Catholics are said to do a number of things they explicitly explain they don’t do.
 
If religion is defined as a system of faith or a believe in a divine being, then it is not. If it is defined as making something supremely important, then it is, but this third definition becomes irrelevant because given such many human actions and beliefs can be seen as religious.
 
What is “religion” according to you? I think we might be talking about slightly different concepts.

Edit: and “worship”?
 
Last edited:
I do not consider any government a god.
You dont but I gave a specific example (North Korea) where the government is literally looked at as a deity, so again those facts are facts. The point is that religion and government are synonymous is certain cultures, they have portraits of the “Dear Leader” in every room of house, they must bow at his statue (made of pure gold), if they commit heresy (speak negatively of the “Dear Leader” in any way) they are excommunicated to concentration camp along with 3 generations of cousins, etc etc etc. And that is just one of many cultures you could cite. So one can be Atheist (not worship Biblical God or God who created Universe, etc) yet still be religious (worship Government). Its just one of several examples.
 
real atheists
Very few “real atheists” as that implies they are free to act any way they please, e.g. murder someone who irritates them, steal from a store to save money, etc. Far more “verbal atheists”, who say they’re atheists but then act in accordance with Judeo-Christian principles, e.g. 10 commandments. We all know actions trump words in terms of indicating true beliefs.
 
If they literally regard KJU as a god (which they don’t, they just dont want to die), then they’re not atheists
Not true, I’d suggest reading up on that. Many do literally regard him as a deity.

They’re not atheists in common meaning of not believing in God who created Universe
 
Jews don’t believe in a God who created the Universe? I think this conversation has run its course.
 
You dont but I gave a specific example (North Korea) where the government is literally looked at as a deity, so again those facts are facts. The point is that religion and government are synonymous is certain cultures
In modern times NK are one of the few countries that regard leaders as gods, though I’m not sure it counts as the other choice is basically death. But the error is to treat leaders as god like a tenant of atheism. The NK example is a way to force loyalty and squeeze out religious organizations which can split the loyalty citizens. I highly doubt leaders past and present actually believe their divinity.

The Catholic church’s experience in China is a clearer example of a gov viewing religious organizations as a threat to power.

Btw, does it count as religious if it the worship is constantly coerced?
 
One of the definitions of religion is “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith”

I’ve known atheists who most definitely hold to their system of belief with ardor and faith.
 
But that’s the whole point, isn’t it? The secular atheistic nature of it?

It is a visible example of government in the absence of The True Living God with man at the helm.
 
It is not, though the concept of religion in our modern understanding of it is historically knew. Certainly this doesn’t mean people didn’t practice their religion, but people didn’t distinguish their religion from the secular.
 
How so? Why the assumption that a god is a requirement?
In the absence of any god, something or someone will usually step up to fill that void.

When I speak of man as his own god, I speak of one who puts his own ideals, morals, virtues/vices intellect above God. It wouldn’t be the first time. We had caesars who were worshipped as gods, & while modern atheists may not have have whole empires worshipping them & bringing in tribute to them, many do their best to quash religious beliefs - especially Christian. The modern temples of atheist thought are today’s universities with very open hostility towards people of faith.

They may not be gods in the supernatural sense, but they do their best.
 
Last edited:
When I speak of man as his own god, I speak of one who puts his own ideals, morals, virtues/vices intellect above God.
Ah ok. I see where this went south. Would it be fair to say that in your view there is always a “god slot” to be filled?

Edit: what’s the difference between God as presented by various denominations or groups vs stating man’s ideals and such in the language of religion?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top