Buddha favors religion and shuns having no-religion

[Gjallarhorn]

I have been writing on the forums of atheists and the like; they hate to be called a religion.

As do many theists, because like atheism, theism is not a religion, just like red is not a bicycle.

 

[Kerr]

The atheists themselves strongly reject that they are any sort of religion; so why attribute something to them that they abhor so much?

We atheists are not a group, you know. There is no values, no philosophy, no ideas, that atheists share except the disbelief in deities. Basically we are just a bunch of individuals who do not believe in deities, nothing more or less. Some are religious, some are not.

 

[Kerr]

I have been writing on the forums of atheists and the like; they hate to be called a religion.

Atheism is not a religion, but it can be a part of a religion. Same applies for theism, for that matter.

 

[cablescavenger]

Atheism is not a religion, but it can be a part of a religion. Same applies for theism, for that matter.

You mean a follower of a religion could lack a belief in deity and therefore be atheist. I can think of a few Christians that fall into that category they just have difficulty admitting it.

 

[paarsurrey]

You mean a follower of a religion could lack a belief in deity and therefore be atheist. I can think of a few Christians that fall into that category they just have difficulty admitting it.

The Christians are in a suspense; they wrongly took " mythical Christianity" of Paul as teaching of Jesus; which is not the case; the mythical Christianity could not survive in real terms the onslaught of the present age; when they got to know the real teachings of Jesus, they will revert to it.

They won't join atheism/agnosticism/skepticism as it has no sound basis; it is a negative concept.

 

[Road Warrior]

I have been writing on the forums of atheists and the like; they hate to be called a religion.

Yes, they do. There's a good reason for it too. Some atheists love to toss out how a religious person needs to follow the rules of their religion, yet, but not belonging to any religion themselves, they cannot be held equally accountable. Watch how they flip-flop when questioned about how they cannot be a moral person without rules.

 

[gnostic]

Atheism only deal with the question of DEITY or deities...especially of their existence. You can have religion without a god or gods or creator gods.

Buddhism is a perfect example of atheistic religion, for it required no deities for spirituality.

 

[Road Warrior]

Atheism only deal with the question of DEITY or deities.

Not all atheists believe that. I agree, taking the word solely by itself, it only deals with "diety", but for many atheists it is more than simply a question of God.

Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers and several other leaders in atheist political/social groups expand it to mean purely secular as opposed to beliefs in "woo".

 

[paarsurrey]

You can have religion without a god or gods or creator gods.

A revealed religion cannot be without the concept of the Creator God.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

A revealed religion cannot be without the concept of the Creator God.

Would you say mathematics was "revealed", or created?

 

[beerisit]

Not all atheists believe that. I agree, taking the word solely by itself, it only deals with "diety", but for many atheists it is more than simply a question of God.

Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers and several other leaders in atheist political/social groups expand it to mean purely secular as opposed to beliefs in "woo".

Many? Or was that two?

 

[gnostic]

A revealed religion cannot be without the concept of the Creator God.

Well, Buddhism is not exactly a revealed religion, isn't it?

 

[Road Warrior]

Many? Or was that two?

How many would satisfy you? How come I get the idea that no matter how many you were supplied, it wouldn't be enough?

Do you believe in a spiritual realm? An afterlife? Woo?

Do you think the "Four Horsemen of New Atheism" would disagree with this definition?:

Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity, which implies that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units. This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.

Atheism | American Atheists

 

[paarsurrey]

Would you say mathematics was "revealed", or created?

Knowledge of mathematics is acquired . Revealed Religion is not authored by the person who receives it; it is authored by the Creator God and is bestowed to the recipient person.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Knowledge of mathematics is acquired . Revealed Religion is not authored by the person who receives it; it is authored by the Creator God and is bestowed to the recipient person.

Acquired...so neither created nor "revealed". What a coincedence! Neither is the Dharma!

 

[paarsurrey]

Well, Buddhism is not exactly a revealed religion, isn't it?

Present Buddhism is not based on the words revealed to Buddha in consequence of his enlightenment/revelation from the Creator God; it may though have glimpses of the same, as it is not in the original language Buddha spoke or wrote, in my opinion; it was collected some 500 years of Buddha, so it is not in the concentrate form, it is in the dilute form; affected by the thoughts of the people who collected it.

Buddha did receive Word of revelation.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Present Buddhism is not based on the words revealed to Buddha in consequence of his enlightenment/revelation from the Creator God; it may though have glimpses of the same, as it is not in the original language Buddha spoke or wrote, in my opinion; it was collected some 500 years of Buddha, so it is not in the concentrate form, it is in the dilute form; affected by the thoughts of the people who collected it.

Buddha did receive Word of revelation.

Please enlighten us as to how you have discovered the truth of Buddha without being Buddha or through the scriptures which you have stated are dilute (therefore, not trustworthy).

 

[tumbleweed41]

Present Buddhism is not based on the words revealed to Buddha in consequence of his enlightenment/revelation from the Creator God; it may though have glimpses of the same, as it is not in the original language Buddha spoke or wrote, in my opinion; it was collected some 500 years of Buddha, so it is not in the concentrate form, it is in the dilute form; affected by the thoughts of the people who collected it.

Buddha did receive Word of revelation.

Ah, so Buddha was a man.
And he did not receive revelation from God.

Therefore, Buddhism is man made.

 

[Sgloom]

the only thing atheists share in common for certain is not believing in a god/s. thats it. everything else falls into a different category. an atheist can have many different views on everything else.

 

[paarsurrey]

the only thing atheists share in common for certain is not believing in a god/s. thats it. everything else falls into a different category. an atheist can have many different views on everything else.

Then why their stalwarts deny that they are a religion.
Is it the politics of the atheists?

Theists also have different views on everything; nothing special with the atheists?