lol it's not a religion

[quote][b]Neo[/b], a liberator rather than a savior, is a Gnostic Christ. The Gnostics were a loosely connected set of religious dissidents who persevered in various sects throughout history.[/quote]

Atheism is a default option in human being, and it shouldnt be even called that. Religion only starts when someone tells you about it. And that someone is never a higher-being.

Tbh, there’s a difference between [i]atheism[/i] and [i]anti-theism[/i]. A lot of people fall into the second category while claiming to be in the first. Most actual atheists don’t particularly care one way or another.

my nama jeff

God is an atheist He, himself, has no religion he is devout to. He doesn't believe another God created him.

Religion is a system of faith and worship. Atheism is merely and entirely the disbelief in a supernatural entity... ergo it does not meet the definition of a religion. Did I change your mind?

The dictionary definition of religion is that it’s the belief in and worship of a god or gods. So I can’t see how atheism could possibly be considered a religion. It’s completely lacking the core requirement of religion (i.e. belief in god or god’s). But I’m guessing you meant it more in the colloquial sense? As in the behavior of atheists can be fanatical and preachy? In that sense you are probably correct. Some atheists can be just as preachy, dogmatic and fanatical as religious people are, I agree. But I’m always surprised when religious people use the “atheism is a religion” line as a criticism of atheism. By pointing out how the worst aspects religion are sometimes mirrored in atheism aren’t you also exposing religions flaws? It’s an argument that basically says “atheists are just as bad as us”.

Atheism is, by definition, the lack of a religion. The prefix "a" means "without," and "theism" is the belief in the existence of one or more gods or deities. Objectively speaking, atheism isn't a religion, and therefore cannot be the "anti-religion religion." However, if we were to throw objectivity and definitions out the window, I could absolutely see a valid argument for your case. Many (read: [b]not all[/b]) modern atheists take a more active role in their lack of beliefs, to the extent of trying to dissuade those that do have theistic belief structures. This, however, does not reflect the nature of atheism itself, only the natures of the specific people that practice such behavior. Personally, I am an atheist, but I have no qualms with other people following a religion. As long as you don't try to convert me or force me to abide by the principles of a religion that I don't believe in, we're cool. Hell, I'll go a step further and acknowledge that religion can be a great benefit to some people. The "love thy neighbor" and "do good in the world" messages that are present in many religions are great to follow, regardless of your beliefs. If all of the Christians in the world actually practiced what they preached, the world would be all the better for it. However, I personally cannot look at the state of this world and believe that the existence of a "benevolent god" is feasible. If there [i]is[/i] a higher power, I wholeheartedly believe that he/she/it is apathetic towards us [i]at best[/i]. If you can look out at the world and still maintain faith that a higher power actually cares about us, then you're a much stronger person than I am. Personally, I'll take my chances on the existence of hell. I'm not entirely convinced that I'm not already here.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by anti-religion religion?

The satire of religion is that it teaches you to find universal significance through you service to a deity while at the same time serving mankind while only promising you'll be rewarded after you die.

You're back?

Devan Mendacio would like to have a few words with you