Atheism is the punk rock of religion

[Reforged]

So let me see if I can't make this clear enough for even you to understand Raphael

Given this:

Something that someone ascribes supreme importance to, ie consumerism, = religion

You agreed that atheism can be something that someone could ascribe supreme importance to. (see post #72)

You have therefore said that atheism is a religion.

1. You quoted some dictionary that a definition of religion is: "A pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance
- consumerism is the new religion"

We both agree that consumerism isn't a religion per se. But nonetheless, according to the dictionary you quoted, religion does actually mean in one sense, that "a persuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance to", ie atheism, would actually constitute a religion using your own example.

YOU HAVE THEREFORE SAID THAT ATHEISM IS A RELIGION

---

Let me remind you what you said again
From post #61 above:

and what Wikipedia says about Atheism:

Therefore, Wikipedia, and I state that: "Some religions" do not "have atheistic views toward other religions". Some religious people are atheist.

Theists of a particular religion can be atheist towards any other deity than their own. So they are not atheists. But theists with limited deities. Theism is defined as only necessarily having a belief in one or more deity. Just one deity is allowed. Your Dorkins dogma is tripping you up, you individual and unique thinker you.

Now on the separate and ACTUAL point, that atheists can be religious, Wikipedia furnishes us with examples of religions where belief in deity is not needed. ie Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Neopagan movements such as Wicca.

I SAY: SOME ATHEISTS ARE RELIGIOUS, IN THE STRICT MEANING OF THE WORD: IE FOLLOW RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS ATHEISTS

---

You didn't say that here:
(repeated on post #53)

Exhibit one.

You said: Atheism = lack of belief in a god/ gods. Nothing else.
vs
YOU SAY: NO!, ATHEISM IS A POSITION ON THINGS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST

Like black holes, aliens, dark matter.

Also 'Scientific proof' is an oxymoron. Science proves nothing, it simply provides a way to logically evaluate evidence based on certain assumptions and arrive at the most plausible conclusion.

So your atheism seems very different to the definition I provided you with: lack of belief in god/ gods

And then you went further to define atheism thus:

Rhythm kindly corrected you:

To which you responded with this nonsense:

Exhibit 2

You said: Atheism = lack of belief in a god/ gods. Nothing else.
vs
YOU SAID: NO! "ATHEISTS DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING SUPERNATURAL WITHOUT PROOF"

Your defense: Quote the Dork.

We've had plenty atheists on here who believe in the supernatural. And how could they call themselves atheist, when to you they were clearly not atheist, because they 'believe in the unprovable'?

YES AGAIN, YOU SAY THAT ATHEISM IS SOMETHING OTHER THAN LACK OF BELIEF IN GOD/ GODS



Raphael makes the following points:

1. Atheism is a religion (correct by his own research)
2. Atheistic religions don't exist (despite proof of such presented)
3. Atheism is the lack of belief in god/ gods, "thats simply what it is, a lack of belief and nothing else" (widelyt agreed) except that...
4. Atheism is the lack of belief in anything proven
5. Atheists don't believe anything supernatural without proof (clearly disproven)


Raphael also states that he has said nothing at all contradictory, and that it's all in my imagination, and he'd like me to just quote where he has contradicted himself.

I have "lied" and that I have not shown these contradictions that I quote above from a previous post in this thread. I am bullshitting about what I've just presented again.

And you, dear reader, like himself, will be able to see Raphael vindicated by that lack of evidence above.

"Atheism = lack of belief in a god" is a statement of yours, not of mine. I merely quoted you.

"1. Atheism is a religion (correct by his own research)"
You admitted consumerism is not actually a religion, it simply shares characteristics in that it has quite a following. How you can say Atheism is actually a religion through the same definition is beyond me as it shows incredible bias against Atheism in particular.

"2. Atheistic religions don't exist (despite proof of such presented)"
They don't. People within a religion can possess certain atheistic views but that does not make the religion itself atheistic. Also all of the religions you listed hold claims of the supernatural and have figures which posses powers on par with any deity and are worshipped as one, this means they could not be seen as being atheistic.

"3. Atheism is the lack of belief in god/ gods, "thats simply what it is, a lack of belief and nothing else" (widelyt agreed) except that..."
3., 4. and 5 should really be put in the same point.

"4. Atheism is the lack of belief in anything proven"
er... no... no it isn't. I'm not sure where you got that from.

"5. Atheists don't believe anything supernatural without proof (clearly disproven)"
Someone who believes in ghosts or psychics or any mystic mumbo jumbo like that we would call a spiritualist. Yes they have atheistic views but they are defined by what they *do* believe rather than what they do not.

I said you had lied about giving examples of contradictions I had not already proven were not contradictions.
All of the points raised I had already countered but as all can see I countered them once again without resorting to four pages of deflection, evasion, bold/coloured text and insults that you deem necessary in almost all of your retorts.
Your move. :-)

P.S. "black holes, aliens, dark matter" all of these are theories except for black holes as we can see the physical effects exerted on anything that crosses one.