How atheists became the most colossally smug and annoying people on the planet

VIDEODROME said:
If OtherOne is recognized as an expert on religion I guess I'll read what he has to say about it.
Click to expand...

He isn't. But since he was the one arguing the point, I accepted his definition for the sake of argument.

Agreeing on terms is a prerequisite for debate.
 
erowe1 said:
If you've kept up with the conversation, I have said clearly that not all atheists have the same religion, only that they all have religions.

The definitions that you just copied and pasted don't say that to have a religion one must claim to know the cause, nature, or purpose of the universe.

All thinking people, including atheists, have fundamental sets of beliefs and practices.

If you believe that the universe is not the creation of a superhuman agency, then you have a belief concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency.

If you don't like the definition, that's fine. But that's the one OtherOne wanted, so I'm going with it.
Click to expand...

The definition I quoted said that a "number of persons" had to agree on all opinions but that is simply impossible. Everyone has a different opinion on something.
 
erowe1 said:
Could you provide the quote where I said that? Because this doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Post 308 you stated catholicism was a religion. In post 313 you wrote: "Any given Catholic only has one religion. Granted, they might not end up really agreeing with official Catholicism, so their religion may end up actually being something else unique to them."
The given "catholic" (his religion) doesn't agree with all the dogma, creating his own religion? Is this correct?
 
erowe1 said:
Let me step back from saying everyone has a religion. I can't prove that, and it would be a rabbit trail to try. Suffice it to say that, at the very least, all atheists have religions according to the definition you gave.
Click to expand...

An atheists worldview is certainly colored by his lack of belief in a deity....it's the very definition of atheism.
In regards the definition provided:
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies,
"Beliefs concerning the universe as the creation of a superhuman agency". An atheistic worldview is absent any notion of a supernatural power. No atheist has beliefs about anything being created by a superhuman agency.
 
otherone said:
An atheists worldview is certainly colored by his lack of belief in a deity....it's the very definition of atheism.
In regards the definition provided:
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies,
"Beliefs concerning the universe as the creation of a superhuman agency". An atheistic worldview is absent any notion of a supernatural power. No atheist has beliefs about anything being created by a superhuman agency.
Click to expand...

You know it says "especially when considered..." right? There are religions that do not have a superhuman creator as well.
 
Last edited:
I think we should raise some money to send this thread to a legal team and let them sort it out while we have coffee and racial donuts.
 
fr33 said:
The definition I quoted said that a "number of persons" had to agree on all opinions but that is simply impossible. Everyone has a different opinion on something.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that nobody in the world has a religion, because any two people must disagree on something?

Let's say we did categorize religions that specifically, so that every single person had their own religion. I don't have a problem with looking at it that way if that's what you want to do. But that still works with the definition you quoted. Since one is a number.
 
otherone said:
Post 308 you stated catholicism was a religion. In post 313 you wrote: "Any given Catholic only has one religion. Granted, they might not end up really agreeing with official Catholicism, so their religion may end up actually being something else unique to them."
The given "catholic" (his religion) doesn't agree with all the dogma, creating his own religion? Is this correct?
Click to expand...

I think that's correct. That doesn't look anything like what I quoted you saying though.
 
otherone said:
No atheist has beliefs about anything being created by a superhuman agency.
Click to expand...

That is a ridiculous claim. All atheists have such beliefs. That's what makes them atheists.

ETA: I see what you're doing. You're using what Frank Lee Seaux said earlier, that atheism is "lack of a belief." This is not the normal definition of "atheism," though it's popular among atheist apologists. The definition I have been using is the normal one, which is the belief that there is no god.

However, even using your definition of atheism (what Frank called "soft atheism" or something like that), what I said still stands, at least most of the time. I think someone in a vegetative state would qualify as an atheist, strictly by what you said. But I don't think that soft atheism is supposed to be THAT soft. I think it's at least more for people who have given consideration to the idea of a god. And if we are talking about such people, then whatever beliefs they have in light of such consideration, must constitute a religion according to the definition you quoted.
 
Last edited:
erowe1 said:
So you're saying that nobody in the world has a religion, because any two people must disagree on something?

Let's say we did categorize religions that specifically, so that every single person had their own religion. I don't have a problem with looking at it that way if that's what you want to do. But that still works with the definition you quoted. Since one is a number.
Click to expand...

You've already backed off your "everyone has a religion" stance, so I won't question how a catholic can also have another religion, as you've claimed.
 
otherone said:
You've already backed off your "everyone has a religion" stance, so I won't question how a catholic can also have another religion, as you've claimed.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, when I mentioned a professing Catholic possibly having another religion, I meant that, if one were to point to their beliefs and say they disqualify them from really being Catholic, then they would still have some other religion instead of Catholicism, not in addition to it. I said it that way because I was thinking that there were probably a lot of people out there who identified as Catholics but who had beliefs that were incompatible with official Catholicism. Those beliefs might disqualify them from being true Catholics (and I don't even care to press this point, I only say it for the sake of those who might). But they don't disqualify them from having some religion.
 
Last edited:
VIDEODROME said:
No atheist has a belief in a superhuman agency creating anything.

Does this make more sense erowe1?
Click to expand...

Yes. That makes sense. But the definition OtherOne provided uses the word "concerning." And a belief concerning something is a belief about something. It is not a belief in something.
 
erowe1 said:
That is a ridiculous claim. All atheists have such beliefs. That's what makes them atheists.

ETA: I see what you're doing. You're using what Frank Lee Seaux said earlier, that atheism is "lack of a belief." This is not the normal definition of "atheism," though it's popular among atheist apologists. The definition I have been using is the normal one, which is the belief that there is no god.

However, even using your definition of atheism (what Frank called "soft atheism" or something like that), what I said still stands, at least most of the time. I think someone in a vegetative state would qualify as an atheist, strictly by what you said. But I don't think that soft atheism is supposed to be THAT soft. I think it's at least more for people who have given consideration to the idea of a god. And if we are talking about such people, then whatever beliefs they have in light of such consideration, must constitute a religion according to the definition you quoted.
Click to expand...

Actually, no, that's not what I'm doing at all. The first definition I provided claims a religion has beliefs about a creator god. Tell me about the atheist creator god mythos, erowe1.....
 
otherone said:
Actually, no, that's not what I'm doing at all. The first definition I provided claims a religion has beliefs about a creator god. Tell me about the atheist creator god mythos, erowe1.....
Click to expand...

Atheists (at least with the normal definition of "atheist") believe that there is no creator god.

That is the atheist belief about a creator god.

Mythos was not in the definition.

I will try to make this as simple as possible for your sake.

The following is a belief about the Tooth Fairy.
The Tooth Fairy does not exist.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
erowe1 said:
So you're saying that nobody in the world has a religion, because any two people must disagree on something?

Let's say we did categorize religions that specifically, so that every single person had their own religion. I don't have a problem with looking at it that way if that's what you want to do. But that still works with the definition you quoted. Since one is a number.
Click to expand...

I actually do think that nobody has a religion by it's definition. I've seen too much evidence of hypocrisy by those that claim to be religious. Even most of them don't believe in the dogma they are required to.

If you want to start the claim that every single person has their own religion then have at it. You're argument that atheism is a religion has now been destroyed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top