Beginner's Guide to Atheism.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's the thing about the Bible; it can be, and probably has been, used to justify just about anything. I'm just watching a Netflix drama, Underground, at the moment... about slavery... and it's striking how both sides... the slavers and the abolitionists...  both think they're doing God's will.

Everyone who believes in god thinks they're doing gods will..because god always agrees with whomever believes in him..even if the people who believe in him don't agree with each other.

---

[Cyberman]

Correct - the '-ism' suffix is indicative of a belief system. It's attached to the 'theism' part of the word, to which the 'a-' prefix is the negation. Welcome to this, the very first post you've obviously ever read on this forum.

But ism can also be a state or a condition

Also correct. Autism, as poor old Nephy learned, is not a belief in auts. I just didn't fancy posting that image again.

[Whateverist]

Also I don't agree that atheism is ONLY not having beliefs in a god, if one wants to be technical, the -ism in atheism denotes a system, this is why I say atheism is indicative of a religion.

Correct - the '-ism' suffix is indicative of a belief system. It's attached to the 'theism' part of the word, to which the 'a-' prefix is the negation. Welcome to this, the very first post you've obviously ever read on this forum.

Any one here really give a rat's ass for what Huggy thinks atheism is?  Not me.

[Amarok]

Correct - the '-ism' suffix is indicative of a belief system. It's attached to the 'theism' part of the word, to which the 'a-' prefix is the negation. Welcome to this, the very first post you've obviously ever read on this forum.

Any one here really give a rat's ass for what Huggy thinks atheism is?  Not me.

Nope like all uber fundies on this site . He's obsessed with trying to drag us down to his level . To make his nonsense seem more legit . Or to expose some hypocrisy he needs to exist to give it validation .

[Cyberman]

Here's the thing that Pampers Huggy and friends keep missing. Whatever they want the definition of atheism to be, doesn't change what it actually is.

[Whateverist]

Here's the thing that Pampers Huggy and friends keep missing. Whatever they want the definition of atheism to be, doesn't change what it actually is.

Yep, it just doesn't Depends depend on what Huggies Huggy thinks the definition is.

[emjay]

That's the thing about the Bible; it can be, and probably has been, used to justify just about anything. I'm just watching a Netflix drama, Underground, at the moment... about slavery... and it's striking how both sides... the slavers and the abolitionists...  both think they're doing God's will.

Everyone who believes in god thinks they're doing gods will..because god always agrees with whomever believes in him..even if the people who believe in him don't agree with each other.

---

Yeah, I know Just thought I'd mention this cos it was indeed striking to watch.

[Huggy Bear]

No dummy, 'atheism' (a = without, theos = god, ism = system) literally means a 'system without god'. A theist can believe a god exists without being religious, but theism is a system based around a belief in god also known as religion. If an atheist is one who simply holds no beliefs in a god, then atheism is a system based on the non-belief of gods... Got it?

Mmmm....NO. I think Kevin is correct on that particular point.

You are kind of on right track though, IMO....at least to some degree. The most publicly visible brand of capital "A" Atheism, though not a religion by definition, exhibits so many of the negative trappings of religion that it's virtually indistinguishable from it in regards to functionality, save for the lack of belief in gods. 
The fundamentalism, indoctrination, fanaticism, idolatry, and the sanctioned "preaching" of intolerance, imperialism, misogyny, and racism being "righteously" defended as a means of "following the logic" to the end sure as hell seems to take on the flavor of religion, in my view. Big time.

That's one of the reasons why I (and I imagine many others) have no interest in being aligned with the "Atheist Movements" at large.

Atheist religions exist, this is fact. 

New Atheism fits the bill, in my book.


So, I'll allow it.

That being the case, under which category would an atheist religion be filed, theism or atheism?

I think the aforementioned would best be filed under "Deez". 

*emphasis mine*


There really is no clear definition of what constitutes a religion, I consider a religion to be any organized practice of an ideology. For instance, some consider white supremacy to be a religion.


So when I see the op mention an atheist 'guide', I think religion.

Take the Sunday assembly for example, they literally state that they do everything a church does except they leave out god.
https://www.sundayassembly.com/

This is a notice that I am quitting the work that I was doing day-to-day and using my time as CEO (I’m not going anywhere!) to do the thing that is needed more than ever – devoting as much of my energies as possible to spreading the word of what Sunday Assembly does.

Hey, they even do a little evangelizing to boot, how is this different from any other religion?

[Athene]

For all practical intents and purposes, there is no difference.

[Amarok]

This is a notice that I am quitting the work that I was doing day-to-day and using my time as CEO (I’m not going anywhere!) to do the thing that is needed more than ever – devoting as much of my energies as possible to spreading the word of what Sunday Assembly does.

This does not demonstrate atheism is a religion . Only that people can attach religious trappings on to it. But at it's core atheism is not a religion . It's a state of disbelief in the claim god exists . And trotting out some cultists who attach religion to it changes nothing .