Is atheism a religion?

yes, godbunny. your fluffiness in the sky. who is going to heaven next? me, I hope.

I have been discussing the religion of ants at the foot of a 5000 year old tree. they call it atheism. they do not believe in fluff bunny gods in the sky...they say the only thing in the world that exists is their anthill and that makes them very happy.

The observable universe is over 93 billion light years and astronomers estimate there are over 100 billion galaxies in that space. The actual universe is no doubt much bigger, assuming it ever ends.

The mind boggles with the enormity of that. But for a few probes we've not really even seen anything beyond our own planet (and we haven't managed to explore that fully yet - with some of the deepest depths of the ocean as yet undiscovered). 

I suspect out there in the great beyond there are things that would challenge your beliefs as well as those of my own. Things you class as magical and unbelievable to your own comprehension maybe common place on worlds where the physical laws we think are eternal do not exist.

We can only comprehend so much, we are learning, challenging and redifining beliefs. Sometimes science gets things very wrong and for years we take wrong paths, but we learn from mistakes and take new directions. But things do happen outside our comprehension. You seem to only believe what your eyes can see - but even scientists think there are "impossible colours" beyond what our eyes are capable of seeing - and so there could be so much we are missing happening right under our noses, but totally invisible to us. 

I am not going to argue that there is or isn't a God, I've said before and I will say again - I think people should be free to believe in whatever seems right to them, and that belief shouldn't be challenged because it is an important part of who they are.

My point is perhaps we should all be a little more open minded. I doubt very much that the universe is as black and white as you make out.

exactly, God has given us up to our beliefs, and we are to blame for all the rampany evil in our world

Don't get mad, but you're very misinformed.  Science proves what the Bible says.  Like Columbus sailed the seas before they found the earth was round.  The Bible states that thousands of years ago.  Scienctists don't read the depths of the Bible that already says what they have come up with.  In short, there is no way to really talk about this in this little space, but science and the Bible go hand in hand, it proves and disproves mans thoughts of what is or isn't.

Science is man thinking God's thoughts after Him.

Whatever man discovers through science is only a fraction of the magnificence of God's creation.The trouble is men will not acknowledge the Creator God, but the more they discover the more many insist there is no God! Now that is man's studidity.

alongside her man naturally

either you are a world champion or have a rating app 

very droll

"Don't get mad, but you're very misinformed.  Science proves what the Bible says. "

Oh good grief, there's no hope.

Greetings Alex!

Ah, the wonders of atheist logic. With respect I don't think that your arguement is altogether sound.

Forgive me if I am wrong but what you are saying is there little difference between Santa Claus and any specific deity. The problem I see with your rational is you are comparing apples with oranges.

The modern day 'Father Christmas’ was born out of the need for man to have something to represent good cheer, good nature, kindness to others while encompassing gift giving. In another words to provide a representation that is supposed to good about man (and woman) kind. I suppose you can something similar about the 'Tooth Fairy' whom you also mention. Another manifestation to represent something in life, that is the transition from child teeth to those of an adult.

Just do a quick Wiki on 'Santa Claus' and you will see that for some peoples of the world the concept of a "Jolly peace loving old man giving gifts" has not changed in hundreds of years but for other peoples such a concept has indeed moved with the times. I would say there are plenty of other example of such man's need to represent aspects of life having changed over the years. Take the Easter Bunny for instant, once believed to judge children as naughty or nice before presenting Easter eggs.

My point? Concepts to soothe the masses change, Deities do not. Deities exist largely in part to provide a permanent moral compass to their followers with the word they provide (ie Bible & Quran). This is timeless (and as a side note, the problem with most religions is not the word provided but shameless self-indulgent people who choose to interpret such word as they see fit believing a deity would allow them to do as such).

If you have gotten this far, thank you. One final thing, is magic real or not? Such a wonderfully loaded question if ever heard one. Do you not think that 'magic' is a subjective term and subject to much interpretation? Just what do you mean by magic? Pulling a rabbit out a hat perhaps? Magic? No, more an illusion but aren't illusions magic? Maybe the parting of the red sea in the bible was magic? No...maybe an illusion? Better yet some scholars have suggested the parting was a matter of share luck relating to tides and what not. One’s man magical miracle is another man’s luck.

Just maybe your sense is not so common after all???

world champion in your world is that the world in a tea cup or your lunch box as they say

OMG, having read all 140 posts in this thread I am now suffering from existential ennui. BTW my Weltanschauung doesn’t include a god. I also keep a copy of Nietzsche’s “The Anti-Christ” handy in case any Jehovah’s Witnesses come knocking at my door wanting to proselytize me.  >:[

Ahhh, that was a good movie (Stephen King's The Stand), but a much, MUCH better book! Devoured all 1,141 pages in short order... and caught a lot of fish while I read it! Even the ending sentence applies to this conversation: "And it always, at the end, came round to the same place again." Just like this discussion will always come round again. Here, there, anywhere, it will always come round again.

More accurately - some atheists are as obnoxious as the ultra religious

I like the way you unfurled your thought on the matter, Soorat.

My posts #62 tried to bring to their attention that the 5 senses of humans leave them much in the dark from comprehending more of the universe. Science is the crutch to this handicap...coming up with bits and pieces of "physical laws" like lego crumbs they try to put together - conclusions coming forth from that is not always correct.

I believe the majority of humans have sensorial perceptions that extend beyond those 5 senses. They are "plugged in" to the universe and its universal laws so as to feel that there is God (THAT QUESTION) that orders the world.

Not understanding what it is, human endeavor to make sense of it gave birth to religions, that which tries to explain what they all feel. It is not coincidence that all humans except atheist "feel" that there is a God.

The universe is not some infinite space of randomness and chaos where "human" existentialist "free will" is what matters in life.

There is no such thing as "free will" as far as I'm concerned. Humans are vessels and receptacles of forces and energies we do not see.

Atheists collectively are animated by a force that is vying to spread and expand among the populace just as much as religious zealots.

Best rely more on what you intuitively know than on the verdicts and advice of "experts and authorities" - scientists, doctors, priest, etc.

The way atheists speak - they probably would not have questioned the doctors/scientists who suggest they lobotomize their child to cure mental illness in those days where it was practiced.

Atheists, one day, may win their cause if they succeed in lobotomizing mankind of its  extra-sensorial perceptions, and effectively unplug it from it's invisible link to the universe.

Just like those who believed in a God did not question the priests who suggested they burn their witches for whatever reason in those days where it was practiced.   >:[

You deliberately left out what I just said above that to make your point?

I SAID "Best rely more on what you intuitively know than on the verdicts and advice of "experts and authorities" - scientists, doctors, priest, etc."

#145 and 146 is not an apologist's stance for religions.

Very true. Very, very true. But so do a lot of celebrities, and not just for sexual abuse of children, but murder, domestic violence, etc., thanks to all of the money backing their top notch legal eagle defense teams. The Catholic church's money makes these celebrity's bank accounts look like a beggar's tin can in comparison.

Pedophiles exist. They'll go where they can to do what they do so long as they can get away with it. Do you really think, in countries where there are no priests, that pedophiles don't exist?

Which came first? The chicken or the egg?

That being said, I'm not one who supports the industry of Catholic religion...it does appear to be a haven for pedophiles, a wide array of intolerances, and the political strong-arming of control over reproductive system of females.