• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Atheism is a RELIGION

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Still not convincing. People have been twisting these passages to mean the end of the world for ages. They've all been wrong, and you've done nothing to show you are any different.

I wonder how you concluded ' twisting ' instead of calculating or taking a guess .
Just because there are wrong calculations or guesses does Not make the Bible as wrong, just the guesses as wrong.
I find there is No twisting about Luke 21:11. We are seeing 'great' earthquakes in connection to the other global events described in the 24th chapter of Matthew besides the 21st chapter of Luke along with Mark the 13th chapter.
Never before in history have we seen the 'construction fulfillment' of Luke 17:28 as we see this happening today.

When the world of violence ended in Noah's day the people did Not believe Noah.
When un-faithful Jerusalem ended in the year 70 the people there did Not flee Jerusalem as Jesus had instructed.
Those people's guesses or calculations were wrong, but the warning message was Not wrong.

When before in history has the kingdom message of Matthew 24:14 been proclaimed on such a vast international scale as it is now being done.
Even modern technology today has made it possible by reaching people even in remote areas of Earth.
Plus, never before in history have the 'powers that be ' been saying, "Peace and Security..." which that coming saying will prove to be the precursor to the coming great tribulation before Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.
None of this is twisting, but as time has marched on, scriptural knowledge has grown clearer and clearer.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
I wonder how you concluded ' twisting ' instead of calculating or taking a guess .
Just because there are wrong calculations or guesses does Not make the Bible as wrong, just the guesses as wrong.
I find there is No twisting about Luke 21:11. We are seeing 'great' earthquakes in connection to the other global events described in the 24th chapter of Matthew besides the 21st chapter of Luke along with Mark the 13th chapter.
Never before in history have we seen the 'construction fulfillment' of Luke 17:28 as we see this happening today.

When the world of violence ended in Noah's day the people did Not believe Noah.
When un-faithful Jerusalem ended in the year 70 the people there did Not flee Jerusalem as Jesus had instructed.
Those people's guesses or calculations were wrong, but the warning message was Not wrong.

When before in history has the kingdom message of Matthew 24:14 been proclaimed on such a vast international scale as it is now being done.
Even modern technology today has made it possible by reaching people even in remote areas of Earth.
Plus, never before in history have the 'powers that be ' been saying, "Peace and Security..." which that coming saying will prove to be the precursor to the coming great tribulation before Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.
None of this is twisting, but as time has marched on, scriptural knowledge has grown clearer and clearer.

It's twisting because they are taking a passage that vaguely describes an event. And when I say "vaguely describes," I mean the description is so vague that people have been saying that the passage clearly belongs to whatever time period they lived in, not matter what time period it was. If the passage can refer to so many different time periods, it is certainly not specific! Yet so many people claim they have used these vague descriptions to gain specific information. For example, you mention great earthquakes - but there are ALWAYS earthquakes! You mention that all the signs are coming together like they never have before, but people have been saying that for centuries. Your proclamations would be more impressive if they didn't sound exactly the same as all the other proclamations we've heard in the past - the proclamations that fell flat and failed.

And your claim that it just makes the guesses wrong, not the Bible wrong, is worthless. Using this logic, you can cling to your belief that the Bible is always right no matter what. It allows you to ignore anything that would prove it wrong.

So you aren't being very convincing.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
You failed to address my specific, fulfilled prophecies:

Israel to be scattered in diaspora to many, many nations (check) while
Retaining Hebrew, identity, Judaism, practice (check) while
Being a blessing in each nation, for example, Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence - Wikipedia (check) while
Being persecuted in each nation, horribly (check) while
Retaining identity and being persecuted without a sound, logical reason (check) then
Returning to their land, making it a Jewish-led nation in one day's time (check) while
Being surrounded by and assailed by enemies (check) while

I thought that I had already described to you what separates low quality prophecy such as biblical prophecy, horoscopes, psychics, and the like, from high quality prophecy. The restoration of Israel was self-fulfilling, and the predictions too vague, two indicators of low quality prophecy.

The least that would be required in this case would be a date, and even then, that would not be enough inasmuch anybody that could read would know that they could fulfill prophecy if they waited until that date. If the date given were wrong, that would also be a problem, wouldn't it? But no date was offered because we simply never see that type of specificity in biblical prophecy, which is why it is not persuasive to the skeptic.

Fulfilling 60 other literal, specific prophecies since 1948.

I've seen what you call a specific prophecy. I gave you examples of specific (high quality) prophecy from fiction and science - prophecies that would be compelling to anybody, not just those predisposed to believe that they are evidence of divine prescience.

Once a person decides that the prophecies come from a god, which is done by faith, that is what he will see. It's a very familiar pattern. It goes by the name faith-based confirmation bias.

I've noticed that my atheist friends when "nailed" by specific, measurable prophecies wriggle away.

You seem to think that the prophecies you offered were compelling, and that atheists remain atheist even after seeing them out of stubbornness or rebellion. Sorry, but that is not the case. Do we do that with other ideas - stubbornly refuse to believe that the earth is not flat despite the evidence offered by the spherical earthers? Of course not.

The prophecies you offered don't rise to the standard required by a skeptical, critical thinker to be convinced that they aren't human in origin.

If you had a very beautiful house that became infested with rats would you get rid of your house

Would these be rats that I created in my own image and claimed to love, rats I had the power to modify to my liking rather than exterminate?

Never before in history have we seen the 'construction fulfillment' of Luke 17:28 as we see this happening today.

I'm unfamiliar with the term "construction fulfillment" in the religious sense. Google only provided links related to building construction contractors such as Construction Fulfillment - CHB Industries .

Luke 17:28 says, "Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded" Never before in history have we seen eating, drinking, buying, selling, planting, and building as we see happening today? Have you noticed that more people than ever are living longer, are healthier, are better educated, have more economic and social opportunity, have more comfortable and less tedious lives.

Christian theology depends on the world becoming worse. As I noted above, a faith-based confirmation bias causes the mind it protects to see what it wants to see. Many Christians seem to have a desire to see the world becoming worse in the hope that we are presently close to Armageddon and world destruction. That kind of thinking worries many, especially when it finds its way into the upper echelons of government and those who enact laws and set policy :
  • "We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at hand" - James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Reagan (note his position and responsibilities)
  • "My point is, God's still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous." - Sen. Inhofe, R-Okla
  • "The Earth will end only when God declares it's time to be over. Man will not destroy this Earth. This Earth will not be destroyed by a flood. . . . I do believe God's word is infallible, unchanging, perfect." - Rep John Shimkus, R-Ill.
These are people are praying for apocalypse, and can be expected to sit idly by. They would not only sit idly by watching as the earth courted disaster, they would be expected to actively assist in its demise.

When before in history has the kingdom message of Matthew 24:14 been proclaimed on such a vast international scale as it is now being done.

Matthew 24:14 says, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

The gospel has been preached in all the world for as long as that has been possible, and it has become progressively easier to reach people since. Perhaps people were citing the same scripture and asking the same question you did when Gutenberg invented the printing press and began mass producing Bibles Never before could the gospel be spread so easily. Surely that must have been close to the end of days. But that was centuries ago.

I'll bet the same was true when mail service first appeared, the then the telegraph came along, then moving pictures, then the telephone and television, then the Internet. It's not a sign that the Bible is eerily prophetic. It's a sign that culture and technology evolve. Man is a very clever ape. It's hard to imagine how we can improve on near instantaneous written and spoken global communication
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
The official definition of Atheism #151

atheism. n. disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Conclusion

1. It is a religious claim, and not rooted in science, logic, philosophy etc.

2. The claim for belief in God (The Dawkin's Scale *)


3. The claim for disbelief in God

4. The claim for without belief in God

(vs. not making a choice when everything has its causes and effects, IS A CHOICE - Burden of Proof)​

* There are 320,000,000 Gods

Therefore, the definition of Atheism asserts the belief in 320,000,000 Gods.

Atheism is a Religion.



*
32875_d906475e782b3585164cb3d645cae9fa.png


Premise 1: Who is an Atheist?

Pure Agnostic: God's existence and non-existence are exactly EQUIPROBABLE.
Weak Atheist: I do not know whether God exists, but I'm declined to be SKEPTICAL.
De-facto Atheist: I cannot know for certain, but I think God is very IMPROBABLE.​

Premise 2: "Equiprobable, skeptical, improbable" means:

1. Disbelief in God(s)
2. Belief in God(s)​

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion: Atheism is a religion with 320,000,000 Gods
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------



4. Pure Agnostic

God's existence and non-existence are exactly EQUIPROBABLE.​

equiprobable: (of two or more things) equally likely to occur; having EQUAL PROBABILITY.

Therefore:

1. Disbelief in God(s)
2. Belief in God(s)
3. Therefore, the definition of Atheism asserts the belief in 320,000,000 Gods.​


5. Weak Atheist

I do not know whether God exists, but I'm declined to be SKEPTICAL.​

skeptical
1. not easily convinced; having doubts or reservations.
2. relating to the theory that certain knowledge is impossible.
Therefore:

1. Disbelief in God(s)
2. Belief in God(s)
3. Therefore, the definition of Atheism asserts the belief in 320,000,000 Gods.​


6. De-facto Atheist

I cannot know for certain, but I think God is very IMPROBABLE.​

improbable
1. not likely to be true or to happen.

synonyms: unlikely, not likely, doubtful, dubious, debatable, questionable, uncertain;
More: unexpected and apparently inauthentic.
Therefore:

1. Disbelief in God(s)
2. Belief in God(s)
3. Therefore, the definition of Atheism asserts the belief in 320,000,000 Gods.

Progress:

The definition #1 #151 Atheism is a Religion . #6 #32#37 #41 #205 #223

Strawman Fallacy: #235

Worldviews: #241
I would say that atheism is a religious belief, but it’s not a religion in and of itself.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
It's twisting because they are taking a passage that vaguely describes an event. And when I say "vaguely describes," I mean the description is so vague that people have been saying that the passage clearly belongs to whatever time period they lived in, not matter what time period it was. If the passage can refer to so many different time periods, it is certainly not specific! Yet so many people claim they have used these vague descriptions to gain specific information. For example, you mention great earthquakes - but there are ALWAYS earthquakes! You mention that all the signs are coming together like they never have before, but people have been saying that for centuries. Your proclamations would be more impressive if they didn't sound exactly the same as all the other proclamations we've heard in the past - the proclamations that fell flat and failed.
And your claim that it just makes the guesses wrong, not the Bible wrong, is worthless. Using this logic, you can cling to your belief that the Bible is always right no matter what. It allows you to ignore anything that would prove it wrong.
So you aren't being very convincing.

Being very convincing, and stressing what we can learn from the Bible does Not have to mean the same thing.
One historian calculated that out of all the people Jesus encountered only 1% became his followers.
That does Not make Jesus as wrong - Matthew chapter 7.
I stressed Luke 21:11 because in that verse Luke used the adjective "GREAT" to describe the types of earthquakes that would be happening in connection to and with the other international events going on at the same time.
So, the earthquakes being "GREAT" in our time frame is as written.
1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 will also prove to be right. The coming saying, "Peace and Security..." will prove to be the precursor to the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14. That will be very convincing !
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
Being very convincing, and stressing what we can learn from the Bible does Not have to mean the same thing.

Huh?

You are trying to make the argument that the Bible contains actual prophecies.

I am telling you that you have not made a very convincing argument for this claim.

One historian calculated that out of all the people Jesus encountered only 1% became his followers.
That does Not make Jesus as wrong - Matthew chapter 7.

I don't see what that has to do with what I said. I'm talking about the vague descriptions in prophecies, you are talking about Jesus' conversion rate...

I stressed Luke 21:11 because in that verse Luke used the adjective "GREAT" to describe the types of earthquakes that would be happening in connection to and with the other international events going on at the same time.
So, the earthquakes being "GREAT" in our time frame is as written.

Irrelevant. Earthquakes have always been and will always be common.

1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 will also prove to be right. The coming saying, "Peace and Security..." will prove to be the precursor to the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14. That will be very convincing !

Because the world is SOOOOOO peaceful right now, isn't it?

When it happens, lemme know. But it ain't gonna happen.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
It's a belief ABOUT religion, not a religious belief itself.

In just the same way, thinking that Star Trek is terrible is not a kind of Trek fandom.
Thinking that Star Trek is terrible is a “Star Trek thought”. I’m not sure why you jumped to fandom. A religious belief doesn’t mean “I’m a fan of religions”.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
I thought that I had already described to you what separates low quality prophecy such as biblical prophecy, horoscopes, psychics, and the like, from high quality prophecy. The restoration of Israel was self-fulfilling, and the predictions too vague, two indicators of low quality prophecy.

The least that would be required in this case would be a date, and even then, that would not be enough inasmuch anybody that could read would know that they could fulfill prophecy if they waited until that date. If the date given were wrong, that would also be a problem, wouldn't it? But no date was offered because we simply never see that type of specificity in biblical prophecy, which is why it is not persuasive to the skeptic.



I've seen what you call a specific prophecy. I gave you examples of specific (high quality) prophecy from fiction and science - prophecies that would be compelling to anybody, not just those predisposed to believe that they are evidence of divine prescience.

Once a person decides that the prophecies come from a god, which is done by faith, that is what he will see. It's a very familiar pattern. It goes by the name faith-based confirmation bias.



You seem to think that the prophecies you offered were compelling, and that atheists remain atheist even after seeing them out of stubbornness or rebellion. Sorry, but that is not the case. Do we do that with other ideas - stubbornly refuse to believe that the earth is not flat despite the evidence offered by the spherical earthers? Of course not.

The prophecies you offered don't rise to the standard required by a skeptical, critical thinker to be convinced that they aren't human in origin.



Would these be rats that I created in my own image and claimed to love, rats I had the power to modify to my liking rather than exterminate?



I'm unfamiliar with the term "construction fulfillment" in the religious sense. Google only provided links related to building construction contractors such as Construction Fulfillment - CHB Industries .

Luke 17:28 says, "Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded" Never before in history have we seen eating, drinking, buying, selling, planting, and building as we see happening today? Have you noticed that more people than ever are living longer, are healthier, are better educated, have more economic and social opportunity, have more comfortable and less tedious lives.

Christian theology depends on the world becoming worse. As I noted above, a faith-based confirmation bias causes the mind it protects to see what it wants to see. Many Christians seem to have a desire to see the world becoming worse in the hope that we are presently close to Armageddon and world destruction. That kind of thinking worries many, especially when it finds its way into the upper echelons of government and those who enact laws and set policy :
  • "We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at hand" - James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Reagan (note his position and responsibilities)
  • "My point is, God's still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous." - Sen. Inhofe, R-Okla
  • "The Earth will end only when God declares it's time to be over. Man will not destroy this Earth. This Earth will not be destroyed by a flood. . . . I do believe God's word is infallible, unchanging, perfect." - Rep John Shimkus, R-Ill.
These are people are praying for apocalypse, and can be expected to sit idly by. They would not only sit idly by watching as the earth courted disaster, they would be expected to actively assist in its demise.



Matthew 24:14 says, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

The gospel has been preached in all the world for as long as that has been possible, and it has become progressively easier to reach people since. Perhaps people were citing the same scripture and asking the same question you did when Gutenberg invented the printing press and began mass producing Bibles Never before could the gospel be spread so easily. Surely that must have been close to the end of days. But that was centuries ago.

I'll bet the same was true when mail service first appeared, the then the telegraph came along, then moving pictures, then the telephone and television, then the Internet. It's not a sign that the Bible is eerily prophetic. It's a sign that culture and technology evolve. Man is a very clever ape. It's hard to imagine how we can improve on near instantaneous written and spoken global communication

Respectfully, it's highly offensive--not just wishful hand-waving--to say we Jews SELF-FULFILLED prophecies including intense persecution for MILLENNIA to be followed by self-fulfilling prophecy indicating a SPRING 1948 return to the Land. Please stop. If some alt.right person saw such "hate speech..." (shudder).
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Huh
You are trying to make the argument that the Bible contains actual prophecies.
I am telling you that you have not made a very convincing argument for this claim.
I don't see what that has to do with what I said. I'm talking about the vague descriptions in prophecies, you are talking about Jesus' conversion rate...
Irrelevant. Earthquakes have always been and will always be common.
Because the world is SOOOOOO peaceful right now, isn't it?
When it happens, lemme know. But it ain't gonna happen.

The COMING saying, "Peace and Security..." is Not SOOOOO peaceful right now because that is still forthcoming.
Yes, earthquakes are common, but the fact that Luke used the adjective "GREAT" earthquakes in connection to the other features of the composite sign of Matthew 24 and Luke 21 makes is notable.
In other words, things will be look ' rosy ' before the outbreak of the great tribulation of Revelation 7:14,9.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
Thinking that Star Trek is terrible is a “Star Trek thought”. I’m not sure why you jumped to fandom. A religious belief doesn’t mean “I’m a fan of religions”.

You seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of "ANALOGY."
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
The COMING saying, "Peace and Security..." is Not SOOOOO peaceful right now because that is still forthcoming.
Yes, earthquakes are common, but the fact that Luke used the adjective "GREAT" earthquakes in connection to the other features of the composite sign of Matthew 24 and Luke 21 makes is notable.
In other words, things will be look ' rosy ' before the outbreak of the great tribulation of Revelation 7:14,9.

So there will be peace and prosperity, then really big earthquakes, and then the end?

Like I said, lemme know when it happens.

Until; then you are just making claims and giving assurances, but there's no actual evidence. I could claim that a giant kitten is going to think the Earth is a toy and knock the earth into the sun, and assure you that it will happen, and that would carry as much weight as the claims you are making.

In short, I am asking for examples of actual prophecy from the Bible, you have given me claims about the end of the world and said, "And it's really gonna happen!"

You got nothing.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
No I just don’t get the one you’re making. Can you word your argument differently?

Having a position on the validity of religious belief does not make that position itself a religious belief.

And having an opinion about Star Trek doesn't mean you are a Trekkie.

When we say that someone holds a religious belief, it is generally accepted to mean that the person in question holds some religious faith. They believe in some deity.

Yet those who argue that atheism is a religion seem to be arguing like this:

Religion is a religious belief. A religious belief is a belief about religion. Atheism is a belief about religion. Therefore Atheism is a religious belief, therefore atheism is a religion itself!
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Having a position on the validity of religious belief does not make that position itself a religious belief.

And having an opinion about Star Trek doesn't mean you are a Trekkie.

When we say that someone holds a religious belief, it is generally accepted to mean that the person in question holds some religious faith. They believe in some deity.

Yet those who argue that atheism is a religion seem to be arguing like this:

Religion is a religious belief. A religious belief is a belief about religion. Atheism is a belief about religion. Therefore Atheism is a religious belief, therefore atheism is a religion itself!
Thanks for the clarification!

I think my issue with your analogy is that it assumes that a religious belief makes you part of a religion, which I disagree.

If you think Star Trek is terrible, you have a Star Trek opinion— it doesn’t make you a Trekkie.

If you think that belief in god is invalid, you have a god opinion. Since god opinions fall under religious belief, your opinion that belief in god is invalid, is a religious belief.

In my original post I did make a distinction between a religious belief and a religion, in that I think atheism is the former but not the latter. I think there’s a clear difference: theism is a religious belief but not a religion. Various afterlife beliefs are religious beliefs but not a religion. They are component parts, but not the whole.

Much of your post seems to be making a slippery slope argument: if we allow that atheism is a religious belief then it’ll be easier for someone to argue that it’s a religion. I don’t think that’s a good argument. You can’t argue that something isn’t true just because someone else will use that to make a different claim you don’t like. You need to argue on the merits of the original claim itself: is it a religious belief.

Your first sentence was the best, and the one I struggle most to defend against: “Having a position on the validity of a religious belief does not make that position a religious belief itself.”

If someone says “Animal sacrifice is not a valid way to please the gods”, would that not be a religious belief?

I don’t see how that differs from “I do not find belief in god to be valid.”

I do tend to think things we consciously choose not to believe are just as important and informative of our worldview as those things we believe to be true.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the clarification!

I think my issue with your analogy is that it assumes that a religious belief makes you part of a religion, which I disagree.

If you think Star Trek is terrible, you have a Star Trek opinion— it doesn’t make you a Trekkie.

If you think that belief in god is invalid, you have a god opinion. Since god opinions fall under religious belief, your opinion that belief in god is invalid, is a religious belief.

In my original post I did make a distinction between a religious belief and a religion, in that I think atheism is the former but not the latter. I think there’s a clear difference: theism is a religious belief but not a religion. Various afterlife beliefs are religious beliefs but not a religion. They are component parts, but not the whole.

Much of your post seems to be making a slippery slope argument: if we allow that atheism is a religious belief then it’ll be easier for someone to argue that it’s a religion. I don’t think that’s a good argument. You can’t argue that something isn’t true just because someone else will use that to make a different claim you don’t like. You need to argue on the merits of the original claim itself: is it a religious belief.

Your first sentence was the best, and the one I struggle most to defend against: “Having a position on the validity of a religious belief does not make that position a religious belief itself.”

If someone says “Animal sacrifice is not a valid way to please the gods”, would that not be a religious belief?

I don’t see how that differs from “I do not find belief in god to be valid.”

I do tend to think things we consciously choose not to believe are just as important and informative of our worldview as those things we believe to be true.

As I said, a belief about a religion is NOT the same as a religious belief.

If someone says that they have religious beliefs, most people will take it to mean that they believe in God in some way.

Because of this, I think saying atheism is a religious belief is unclear and can lead to misunderstandings.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
So there will be peace and prosperity, then really big earthquakes, and then the end?
Like I said, lemme know when it happens.
Until; then you are just making claims and giving assurances, but there's no actual evidence. I could claim that a giant kitten is going to think the Earth is a toy and knock the earth into the sun, and assure you that it will happen, and that would carry as much weight as the claims you are making.
In short, I am asking for examples of actual prophecy from the Bible, you have given me claims about the end of the world and said, "And it's really gonna happen!"
You got nothing.

I never stated that 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 says 'peace and prosperity', but that the ' powers that be ' will be saying, "Peace and Security..." that does Not necessarily have to mean there will be actual peace or safety, but that they will be saying, "Peace and Security ..."
I also did Not say, 'then really big earthquakes' , but that ' great ' earthquakes are part of the on-going composite sign, or events as featured in the 24th chapter of Matthew and the 21st chapter of Luke. (Luke 21:11)
I wonder if you don't think that even tsunami's don't fall into the category of earthquakes.
Even trouble-making religion puts itself on the United Nation's radar, so to speak.
Terrorism has created a hauntingly dangerous religious climate brewing in today's world.
So, with backing the U.N. can be strengthened to become God's modern day 'arm of the law' to rid the earth of such trouble-making religions, even starting with the just so-called Christian 'Christendom '.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
...........
If someone says that they have religious beliefs, most people will take it to mean that they believe in God in some way.
Because of this, I think saying atheism is a religious belief is unclear and can lead to misunderstandings.

Then, atheism is the belief that there is No God, thus a faith in the non-existence of God.
I wonder can an atheist prove there is No God, since I find that can Not be proven then..............
 

sooda

Veteran Member
I'm not asserting anything.. I'm analyzing the official definition of Atheism and find out whether the argument is valid or not.

What is the practice or atheism? Do they have clergy, meeting houses or churches? Do they have a creed? How do they worship? Who are their saints?
 
Top