Is atheism a religion?

[Grazer]

No, it doesn't. You can't have faith that something doesn't exist.

I remember the debate between John Lennox and Michael Shermer and John asked whether Michael believed atheism to be true. Sounds like an odd question but he has a point; Atheism is a belief system which has positive entailments of naturalism and/or materialism.

[video=youtube;Vo96pRA8oNI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vo96pRA8oNI[/video]

When addressing the claims of Professor Richard Dawkins, Professor Alistair McGrath commented;

Most fundamentally, Dawkins fails to demonstrate the scientific necessity of atheism. Paradoxically, atheism itself emerges as a faith, possessed of a remarkable degree of conceptual isomorphism to theism..........Some distinguished biologists (such as Francis S. Collins, director of the Human Genome Project) argue that the natural sciences create a positive presumption of faith;[15] others (such as the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould) that they have negative implications for theistic belief. But they prove nothing, either way. If the God-question is to be settled, it must be settled on other grounds.

http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/cis/mcgrath/lecture.html

 

[Atothetheist]

I remember the debate between John Lennox and Michael Shermer and John asked whether Michael believed atheism to be true. Sounds like an odd question but he has a point; Atheism is a belief system which has positive entailments of naturalism and/or materialism.

[video=youtube;Vo96pRA8oNI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vo96pRA8oNI[/video]

When addressing the claims of Professor Richard Dawkins, Professor Alistair McGrath commented;

Most fundamentally, Dawkins fails to demonstrate the scientific necessity of atheism. Paradoxically, atheism itself emerges as a faith, possessed of a remarkable degree of conceptual isomorphism to theism..........Some distinguished biologists (such as Francis S. Collins, director of the Human Genome Project) argue that the natural sciences create a positive presumption of faith;[15] others (such as the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould) that they have negative implications for theistic belief. But they prove nothing, either way. If the God-question is to be settled, it must be settled on other grounds.

http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/cis/mcgrath/lecture.html

Atheism is just a stance on a diety, you can be an atheist and believe in the supernatural.

Belief, is not faith. Not in the slightest.

Atheism is the disbelief in a proposed deity.

 

[Grazer]

Atheism is just a stance on a diety, you can be an atheist and believe in the supernatural.

Belief, is not faith. Not in the slightest.

Atheism is the disbelief in a proposed deity.

Belief is not faith? I actually agree with that to a point. Faith is in response to the truth and reality of someone. Believing there is a spiritual world is not faith in that regard. But if you look at the definition of the word faith in the dictionary, it mentions belief. Belief in the dictionary references religion as an example. Atheism isn't a faith by the definition I've put but faith & belief are not completely mutually exclusive.

 

[Atothetheist]

Belief is not faith? I actually agree with that to a point. Faith is in response to the truth and reality of someone. Believing there is a spiritual world is not faith in that regard. But if you look at the definition of the word faith in the dictionary, it mentions belief. Belief in the dictionary references religion as an example. Atheism isn't a faith by the definition I've put but faith & belief are not completely mutually exclusive.

I never said they were mutually exclusive.

 

[Grazer]

I never said they were mutually exclusive.

Never said you did, I was just trying to be thorough in my explanation of how faith and belief are linked. Though in my defence, your statement Belief, is not faith. Not in the slightest. does suggest they are mutually exclusive

 

[eduardo]

Is atheism a religion? of course it is. Anything we believe in that is not proven is called a religion. Don't rely on dictionary def's because it can't tell you the things concerning the spirit. It can only define mans understanding as it goes along and its short on that too as our understandings grow. I got a tattoo of my zodiac on my right arm and I hate it now. I use to follow Libra religiouly but thanks to God I now know its crap! In Colombus' days they use to religiously believe the world was flat until proven otherwise. Religion is the sense of belief in things that are NOT proven. Truth is the belief in things that are. This is why most are calling the belief in God a religion, defining it as unproven. But those with insight know better. Just my opinion.

 

[King James]

Atheism Genesis

1.Explanation of time, space, gravity, stars, planets, elements, etc. origin:
There was nothing, then a big bang happened, then everything came about.

2.Explanation of life:
There was no life. Then a single celled organism came about.

3.Explanation of human origin:
Fish came about. Some fish stayed fish, others changed into amphibian.
Some amphibian stayed amphibian, others changed into reptiles.
Some reptiles stayed reptiles, other changed into mammals.
From mammals, apes came about.
Some apes stayed apes, others changed into humans.


My problem with this? I can't even get past number 1. Every religion all over the earth, all thru time is more believable than this.

 

[joep222]

Yes.

Religion is a set of beliefs about God.
Atheism is a set of beliefs about God.
Thus Atheism is a religion.

 

[The Unbeliever]

I would say that atheism is not a religion. The reason I state this is that while atheism can be a set of beliefs about God, it can also be the rejection of beliefs about God. In other words, to say "I believe there is no God" is not the same as saying "I do not believe there is a God". The former implies proofs while the latter entails only the denial of proofs.

Simultaneously, as others mentioned, atheism can include many beliefs, from strict naturalism to the encompassing of the spiritualism of Buddhism. I do not see how one could construe a singular religion from such disparate possibilities.

 

[Arch Angle]

The first clue is when a group claim "they are not areligion" for me. I have heard thatbefore.

then I see if they make a claim as a base referencepoint. "There is no god". that’s one. Itis the same as 'there is a god". but just a little different.
Do they meet and discuss how they "have the truth and"them others" don't". The 'we have clearity, logic, and reason" stance.

so far so good. The atheistseem to fit.

Then, how much "faith" do they have. That being lack of "measurable" proof fortheir stance. "there is nogod". I see absolutely no proof forthat statement, it is based on "blind faith".

So I guess it depends on who you talk to. But I think, if it looks like a duck, walkslike a duck, why call it a rose?

 

[King James]

You never hear of people killing in the name of Atheism. It's never the cause of wars. You don't hear of people threatening violence on another person for talking bad about an Atheists beliefs.

 

[jay55]

Whether it's a religion or not, it is for the simpletons of the world.

 

[turnorburn]

King James said:

You never hear of people killing in the name of Atheism. It's never the cause of wars. You don't hear of people threatening violence on another person for talking bad about an Atheists beliefs.

No and you never will King James because its a religion of the world, see what Jesus has to say about it in..

John 15:19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

tob

 

[His_nee (Jeff)]

Whether it's a religion or not, it is for the simpletons of the world.

strange to hear that. In my view and reading, the Scripture is written and says "not many wise, "(are among the saved ones) and "God chose the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" and
(apparently)
"christian" when it first started being used was mockery of believers by others and MEANT "SIMPLETON" because the believers would forfeit their lives willingly for Jesus,
and the "SIMPLETONS" would tell the truth no matter what, even if they lost their homes or families or lives or houses because of telling the truth (and they did often lose everything for telling the truth );
and
instead of "business like" trying to profit more, the "SIMPLETONS" were honest and would joyfully willingly disclose ANY DEFECT in produce or products or service they has to sell or offer, instead of trying to cover up the problems (to profit more, deceitfully).

And there's a lot more about the believers being very different (a completely different life and way of life than the world)
because
their lives and minds were transformed by Christ Jesus when they were immersed in His Name. (and not just a few of them, but whole assemblies of the ecclesia, united and in union with YHWH! in Christ Jesus, living a life unheard of (and unexpected) among Jews and gentiles.

 

[jay55]

Perhaps I shouldn't have used the term 'simpletons' to describe those that believe/follow/buy into all the ways and ideas of the world. Maybe misguided would be better or blind or foolish.

 

[turnorburn]

Blind is a good word to use

II Corinthians 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

kind of an old thread..

tob

 

[phil marriner]

Atheism can be classed a a religion depending on you definition of religion. One definition is "a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion ".SO atheists can be in pursuit or follow that belief and believe it it true

 

[phil marriner]

I do not put down anyone for we are all the same. Most people are looking for truth in one from or other. Keep seeking knocking and asking and it will be revealed to you