Humanism can be religious, and there is such a thing as religious humanism, just as there simply is such a thing as christian humanism.

Don't take my word for it. I know you have the internet. Google.

The first humanists™ - the people who defined the position..weren't trying to do shit for atheists. They were theists. I can't even grasp at whatever problem you're arguing against with the idea that these are "erroneous definitions" - as if that were even a thing. Definitions are axiomatic. They literally can't be wrong. If you're talking about some other thing, or concerned about some other thing..that doesn't mean that a definition is erroneous, it just means that you're talking about some other thing.

I'm willing to bet that whatever that is also already has a definition.

(April 17, 2020 at 8:21 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Humanism can be religious, and there is such a thing as religious humanism, just as there simply is such a thing as christian humanism.

Don't take my word for it.  I know you have the internet.  Google.

The first humanists™ - the people who defined the position..weren't trying to do shit for atheists.  They were theists.  I can't even grasp at whatever problem you're arguing against with the idea that these are "erroneous definitions" - as if that were even a thing.  Definitions are axiomatic.  They literally can't be wrong.  If you're talking about some other thing, or concerned about some other thing..that doesn't mean that a definition is erroneous, it just means that you're talking about some other thing.

I'm willing to bet that whatever that is also already has a definition.

Indeed 

Quote:Christian humanism regards humanist principles like universal human dignity, individual freedom and the importance of happiness as essential and principal components of the teachings of Jesus. It emerged during the Renaissance with strong roots in the patristic period.

Historically, major forces shaping the development of Christian humanism was the Christian doctrine that God, in the person of Jesus, became human in order to redeem humanity, and the further injunction for the participating human collective (the church) to act out the life of Christ.[1] Many of these ideas had emerged among the patristics, and would develop into Christian humanism in the late 15th century, through which the ideals of "common humanity, universal reason, freedom, personhood, human rights, human emancipation and progress, and indeed the very notion of secularity (describing the present saeculum preserved by God until Christ’s return) are literally unthinkable without their Christian humanistic roots."[2][3][4] Though there is a common association of humanism with agnosticism and atheism in popular culture, this association developed in the 20th century and non-humanistic forms of agnosticism and atheism have long existed.[5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_humanism

(April 17, 2020 at 8:06 pm)Prof.Lunaphiles Wrote:

(April 17, 2020 at 8:00 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: There's nothing wrong with the definitions of any of the terms.  You simply misused them.  In your defense, you misused them in a culturally specific way, explicitly.  

Maybe you should help yourself before you offer help to others?

What's the definition of religion, that you believe to be valid?

If it is not "the exercises for the maintenance of dignity," then it is wrong.

Please cite your source from which you got this definition.

I was going to deconstruct you entire response to me, but anyone with this definition for religion may not be worth the time.

And anyone who claims that their definition (that is unique to only themself) is the only correct one, is certainly not worth the time.

(April 11, 2020 at 8:19 pm)Prof.Lunaphiles Wrote: A child is born secular - not atheist.

Semantics.

Quote:A child is born secular - not atheist.

Unless you came out of your mom with a belief in god your an atheist

Well, it's not semantics. It is beyond implausible that a child is born holding an intrinsic concept of complex and regionally specific superstitions. Let alone a political position on the proper relationship between faith and governance - secularism. Children probably are born atheists, but they cant possibly be born secularists...and just because they're born not believing in things they have no idea or conception of, doesn't mean that they wont one day organically arrive at one. Superstition is an inevitable outcome of human cognition.

-I didn't even know what the country I live in was called when I was born. I couldn't possibly have been an american any more than I could have possibly been a jesus-ist. No fucking clue what either were.

I had to be indoctrinated to both. One stuck, the other didn't.

(April 17, 2020 at 8:21 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Humanism can be religious, and there is such a thing as religious humanism, just as there simply is such a thing as christian humanism.

Don't take my word for it.  I know you have the internet.  Google.

The first humanists™ - the people who defined the position..weren't trying to do shit for atheists.  They were theists.  I can't even grasp at whatever problem you're arguing against with the idea that these are "erroneous definitions" - as if that were even a thing.  Definitions are axiomatic.  They literally can't be wrong.  If you're talking about some other thing, or concerned about some other thing..that doesn't mean that a definition is erroneous, it just means that you're talking about some other thing.

I'm willing to bet that whatever that is also already has a definition.

Subsequent to my argument that the definition of humanism is incorret, all other terms using "humanism" are subject to review, if not inherently erroneous, because of the semantic root reference to the incorrect definition of 'humanism.'

Humnism is not a religion, just as theism is not a religion. And it is very odd that you believe that atheism can be religious. And it is further odd that other members, who are predominately atheists, are not challenging your declaration; unless they are meritoriously forgiving you, because you are trolling me. 

Of course atheism can be religious as long as it doesn't explicitly argue for the existence of a god 

And no it's your definition of humanism that's wrong .The standard definition is fine .

(April 17, 2020 at 10:08 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Well, it's not semantics.  It is beyond implausible that a child is born holding an intrinsic concept of complex and regionally specific superstitions.  Let alone a political position on the proper relationship between faith and governance - secularism.  Children probably are born atheists, but they cant possibly be born secularists..

An individual person cannot be a secularist - the term "secularist" is a misnomer, only organizations, such as republic governing systems can be secular, at best, the only waay a person can be a secularist is by guarding the principle of of unbiased particpation in deliberating civil law - is that now the ultimate conclusion of separating faith from governance? Certainly you would agree that a government that forbids the representation for Christians is not secular - right???

You do not think that "secular" means that theists can participate, but they have to play some mind game that separates their relious beliefs from their political ambitions for organing tranquil community - do you???

What is the definition of "faith," and what distinguishes it from "belief." and distiguishes from "knoledge," and so forth???
have you gotten that far in your studies in seantics?

(April 17, 2020 at 10:08 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: and just because they're born not believing in things they have no idea or conception of, doesn't mean that they wont one day organically arrive at one.  Superstition is an inevitable outcome of human cognition.

Not without consulting with another person who is either going to confirm his perception, thereby constructing a doctrine of explanation for the unexplainable[ or disapprove of the conception of such a entity.

(April 17, 2020 at 10:08 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: -I didn't even know what  the country I live in was called when I was born.  I couldn't possibly have been an american any more than I could have possibly been a jesus-ist.  No fucking clue what either were.

I had to be indoctrinated to both.  One stuck, the other didn't.

Good anaology device, I have never encountered it befor. I consider my evolution to be very similar, if not no different - did you get to marry a fashion model that allows for a semi-open marriage?

Contrary to your previous explanation, American patriotism is not encarnated by the existence of a portion of landmass. Americanism, and American patriotism, are encarnated by the doctrine of liberty campaigned in the legends of the founding of the United States, and the can-do-it-ness of the subsequent history, which ultimately dismisses divine intervention.

The establishment of justice is at odds with belief in an almighty judge, as well. It is kind of amazing that theism has survived so long.

---

(April 18, 2020 at 12:00 am)SUNGULA Wrote: Of course atheism can be religious as long as it doesn't explicitly argue for the existence of a god 

And no it's your definition of humanism that's wrong .The standard definition is fine .

How can that be if atheism is simply the lack of belief in gods - what is the doctrine that a person is "religious" about???

Quote:How can that be if atheism is simply the lack of belief in gods - what is the doctrine that a person is "religious" about???

Simple it's a spiritual belief that doesn't include gods