RE: Atheism is a religion
January 8, 2012 at 9:06 am
(This post was last modified: January 8, 2012 at 9:08 am by amkerman.)
Kichiga:
I believe shelly is a part of God. I believe you are too. I can't help that many posters seem to be either too stubborn or too obtuse to get what I am saying.
Stick with your definitions and cling to your irrational beliefs. It's fine. Believe that "definition"can be objectively "true" or "false". Believe further that objectivity actually exists in reality at all. Great. It is a belief in God, regardless of how you "define" that belief.
Dloubet: your argument is weak. You use definitions of words to argue that my definition of the word "religion" is false. You must first prove that definitions are objectively true. My definition of "religion" is not the only definition and I don't claim it to be the only acceptable one. It is wholly accurate in it's broadest sense. What you are arguing is nonsense. It's like saying only a bluejay is a bird because only IT has IT'S exact characteristics. All other birds aren't really birds because they lack all the characteristics of the bluejay.
You are arguing for one, true, religion. I suspect you are arguing that way to make it easy to refute. However if there is a "true" "religion", then by definition "religion" is objective. If you beleve religion is objective, you necessarily believe in something that can be defined as "God", regardless of whether you call that belief a "belief in God". You can call it, "lack of belief in God" if you want, it is still the same belief.
I believe shelly is a part of God. I believe you are too. I can't help that many posters seem to be either too stubborn or too obtuse to get what I am saying.
Stick with your definitions and cling to your irrational beliefs. It's fine. Believe that "definition"can be objectively "true" or "false". Believe further that objectivity actually exists in reality at all. Great. It is a belief in God, regardless of how you "define" that belief.
Dloubet: your argument is weak. You use definitions of words to argue that my definition of the word "religion" is false. You must first prove that definitions are objectively true. My definition of "religion" is not the only definition and I don't claim it to be the only acceptable one. It is wholly accurate in it's broadest sense. What you are arguing is nonsense. It's like saying only a bluejay is a bird because only IT has IT'S exact characteristics. All other birds aren't really birds because they lack all the characteristics of the bluejay.
You are arguing for one, true, religion. I suspect you are arguing that way to make it easy to refute. However if there is a "true" "religion", then by definition "religion" is objective. If you beleve religion is objective, you necessarily believe in something that can be defined as "God", regardless of whether you call that belief a "belief in God". You can call it, "lack of belief in God" if you want, it is still the same belief.
