So based on your definition of a religion, any such gathering of people assenting to an idea with authoritative books guiding their teachings is a religion. So science is a religion too? Science has people gathering, they assent to the principles of cause and effect and so on. They have authoritative books. Your arguments are riddled with illogical nonsense and non sequitur.
I was following the difference between the two statements, and while I disagree to some degree(lol), you lost credibility when you tried to turn agnosticism into an alternative for atheism. If you read the definitions you provided you clearly note the differentiating characteristic between agnosticism and atheism. Agnosticism unambiguously deals with KNOWLEDGE, whether god's existence is knowable, and atheism deals with BELIEF. It's possible to be one or both, they are not mutually exclusive.
You assume that atheism is the sole commitment to an affirmation that god does not exist exist despite potential evidence that it may. In that sense and with that definition your analysis if correct. However I think your definition is ill affirmed
I contend that opening oneself the the possibility that god may exist should he make himself known does not make them any less of an atheist. Consider the following statement:
'I believe based on my reasonable analysis that god does not exist.'
Atheism is a question of belief, agnosticism is a question of knowledge. Those definitions are not accurate. Atheism is a lack of belief, agnosticism is a lack of knowledge. You might want to check multiple sources & see if any disagree with you before you're an idiot.
Remember Shawn, that games are actually representations of sex magic. It is highly religious, because the "ball", is actually coming from "Ba'al", and you have symbols that are related to vaginas and penises, and balls. The objective of a game (gaymen) is to score inside a hole. But remember than the gayman (game), can not double dribbling, because they is considered "foul." The men that are Gaymen of the game, are symbolic games (sperm), who traverse in the creation of life personified.
Non-religious non-theist is quite a mouthful, and since practically no one actually has the BELIEF that there is no god, why not just use the word atheist for all of that? No, of course, theists won't let us. I don't believe there is a god, I don't believe there isn't, I have no beliefs regarding the existence of god. Just accept this. Stop using semantics to insist that I do. It's pathetic.
@xxSuperNoVa103xx "evolutionism" is not a religion. There is no dogma, no doctrine, no worship, no rituals, no god, no supernatural occurrences, no sacred texts and most importantly NO FAITH. Evolution is based on evidence and reasoning.
@xxSuperNoVa103xx Wrong. There are mountains of evidence supporting the theory of evolution. It's science, not faith. Drop the sophistry and perhaps someday you might be worth taking seriously.
Your absurdity is growing... So, by your logic everyone who rejects the claim of any given group is automatically part of that group in some fashion. I really don't want to consider the level of dimness that you present to be real, however, I can't deny the reality that you are displaying of actual dimness...:(
@designsens. Just because some Christian judge in the USA said it's a religion, doesn't make it so... We live on a planet and its not called the USA. MORON
I'm an atheist. I don't say if I believe or don't believe. I say "I KNOW THERE IS KNOW RELIGION"... so, what do we learn from this? Simple.. You,are an Almighty CLUSTERFUCK of retarded Jesus vomit
You have just left yourself wide open for ridicule. You're going to have to watch every single word you say. Look up the defenition for religion... how the hell can you call atheists religion. Retard
"a group of lawyers could muck up practically anything".
They already have. In the United States the question as to whether or not Atheism is religion has been settled. It has been legally recognized as a religion. So the question as to is it a religion by the theology argument becomes moot.
@maximusjay Settled? That's hilarious. Atheism is a religion in the same way that being a non-stamp collector is a hobby. I don't view reality through the lens of legal opinion. Judged by the collective intelligence of my c/o 2004 JD classmates, it's not a pretty picture. According to precedent, corporations are now considered to be people for the purpose of political contributions. This is the sort of twisted logic that one often finds in the law. It always must be taken with a grain of salt.
The legal term is "Corporate personhood" when you refer to corporations being treated as natural persons. It is not a new concept, it was legally recognized back in 1819. A federal court of appeals ruled in 2005 that atheism is a religion, however the belief that it is a religion may far predate corporations by centuries. So it is not a new concept either. There is no sense arguing about a proven fact. As far as the Law is concerned it is a religion. Eats you up doesn't it.
@maximusjay Do you really expect to pass off such paltry logic? The state of our affairs is not composed of a series of mere legal precedents. Only the most abject of imbeciles could maintain that non-belief in the supernatural (the usual basic proposition espoused by those referred to colloquially as "atheists"), more properly referred to as "materialism," is a religion. Religion involves a suspension of disbelief at some level. Materialism is the diametrically opposed position. QED.
Paltry logic? Lol... State of affairs? Lol... Is that your brief? The case has been decided. You lost. Atheism is a belief, the details of which are taught and discussed; therefore it is a RELIGION. Don't believe me? Take it up with the US Supreme Court...You know...that group of (how did you put it?) oh yea...imbeciles? Lol... Spend some time in front of the looking glass silly. Oh and God Bless...
@maximusjay If you are unable to determine the clear difference between a legal precedent and an existential stance based upon the available evidence, I'm afraid there may be no help for you.
@maximusjay The proposition for which you advocate is positively idiotic. Take that up with stupid voters who elect stupid presidents who select stupid justices.
It is not a justice system, it is a judicial system. Therefore it matters not what your opinion is. You belong to a legally recognized Religion. That is that fact Jack. Now does that not tie your panties into a knot? You don't like the designation? Why don't you move to Canada. As long as you are here then you can soak of the designation. You are the member of a Religion. Your namby-pamby philosophies are therefore rendered moot.
@maximusjay More of the same casuistry, poor logic, red herrings, and appeals to authority (which, as it turns out, you don't even properly understand -- you'd do well to actually read the 7th Circuit's opinion in that case). The plaintiff framed the issue in terms of religion only for legalistic reasons, not for logical ones, and his strategy worked -- he and his secular comrades ultimately were allowed to meet because the prison's prohibition was shown to fail the Lemon test.
@maximusjay The court's opinion doesn't comport with reason or observed reality. Rely on it if you must in order to get your deranged kicks, but understand that nobody with a healthy, functioning brain operates in this fashion.
BTW, the term "atheism" was first put to use by the ancient Greeks in reference to Christians and others who did not believe in the Pantheon.
@maximusjay Circular reasoning ("the Bible is true because it says it's true"), argument from authority, etc. The citation of ancient scriptures gets you exactly nowhere. The next time you accuse someone of employing fallacious reasoning, make sure you haven't littered your own comments with such bunkum.
Ignorant statement by someone who has no Faith in Jesus, has never studied the Bible or the history and archeology of it. You are however a hypocrite, as your basing your faith in your religion on the fact that you can only believe in what you can see and comprehend.
@maximusjay I have studied the Bible and have read lots of the associated scholarly literature. Also, I have studied the Qur'an, The Upanishads, The Ramayana, The Bhagavad Gita, The Analects, The Daodejing, The Enuma Elis, and many other so-called "sacred" texts. None are useful in the least in the 21st century. These texts come from the terrified and ignorant infancy of our species. Modern scientific discovery and secular morality are exponentially superior to the "wisdom" of the ancients.
@maximusjay You know full well that question is well beyond the efficacy of YouTube comments, but the modern (short) answer is Zionism. The ancient (short) answer is the disposition/ownership of The Temple Mount/al-Aqsa.
@maximusjay Those of us who are normal have a term to describe others who base their relationship with reality upon unseen metaphysical forces -- "candidates for inpatient therapy."
@maximusjay No, it doesn't. It requires an absence of delusion -- robust mental health, in other words -- which no genuinely religious or superstitious person can claim.
@maximusjay Anyone who would call an air-tight logical argument "namby-pamby" does not deserve the privilege of engaging in discourse with me. Until you can show via logic and evidence that a person's failure to collect stamps makes him a hobbyist, then you have no argument here. You infantile godbots have been losing ground for hundreds of years; expect it to continue.
You want logic? Okay: It all boils down to this. For me and the Christian world out there, this life is not the end. You should have no problem with that. For you and your fellow religious fanatics, it all ends here. I have no problem with that. So we have common ground. If you are serious about the godbot comment I find it ironic in that you have swallowed the company line, hook, line and sinker. I however follow no religious leader because I actually understand. God Bless.
@maximusjay What callow piffle you continue to spew. There is no company line because, surprise! -- non-belief is not a religion -- it is simply the customary existential stance assumed by those who possess and utilize healthy, normal, untrammeled intellectual capabilities. It is the null hypothesis. It is what you believed before the theocratic succubus sunk her fangs into you. I hope someday you can summon the strength of character required to cast off your imaginary bondage.
Here is some more immature dribble for you to confound you. To believe in nothing is to believe in something. "I hope someday you can summon the strength of character required to cast off your imaginary bondage" From your lips to God's ears. God Bless
@maximusjay Incorrect. The analogy is entirely on point. Predictably, you either do not understand what comprises a straw man argument or deliberately misuse the term. "Atheism" implies skepticism with respect to certain ontological and existential claims and non-participation in certain activities. There's no affirmative content. Religions, conversely, are organized around affirmative declarations of belief and participation in certain rituals. The distinction could not be clearer.
@maximusjay I haven't used a straw man argument because I have not misrepresented your position. You claim that a court's decision is the ultimate arbiter of reality. This is patently untrue. You also make the nonsensical claim that non-participation in certain activities and non-assent to certain propositions somehow makes one a member of the category populated by affirmative participants and believers. One must either be intentionally mendacious or mentally unsound to make such inane claims.
"I haven't used a straw man argument because I have not misrepresented your position" Oh? You were not substituting stamp collecting as an argument that you thought you could easily defeat to represent the argument for no religion? If you can expand outside the box, can you limited me to it?
Speaking for myself. I hate your God at a level that I would hate a bad guy in any other book. In reality you can't hate someone that does not evidentially exist. How can you wish someone dead that never existed in the first place? That is moronic. So NO, atheists DO NOT hate your God, only his character in your mythology. As for atheists "hating" Christians - no. Do we think you are deluded? 100%
Also, just because you believe in something does not make it a religion, I'm sure you believe in gravity but does that mean you religiously believe in gravity? Oh and here is a definition of religion for you: The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
I'm not saying that there is absolutely no God or Gods, I'm just saying I do not believe in the existence of all the Gods that humans currently worship and believe in.
@333MJH That's the correct position -- the "null hypothesis." The study of nature reveals a very strong bias against the existence of the supernatural, but it is impossible to disprove that which is unfalsifiable.
AGNOSIS is not a religion, because it is indecision. Atheism is because it is an ideology that you proport and lift up with a usual scientific belief.
Venom, venom venom. I agreed with you until 4:45 when you called me agnostic. Im sure you have heard this before but, are you agnostic towards Santa. No. You are atheist towards Santa however you must remain open to the possiblity as you cant prove he doesn't exist. The atheistt states "I do not beleive that there is a god however if you were to provide scientific evidence then I would believe." An agnostic states "I dont know if there is a god or not."
Granted a broad definition of religion (cult or ideology) - ranging from Buddhism, Greek mythology, to Wiccanism or what have you - what you say makes perfect sense that only fundamentalists from atheistic camp will fervently deny:
1) If There's no God, then all religions are false, i.e. worldviews that metamorphosed into ideology
2) (New) Atheism is a worldview which is transmuting into an ideology
3) Atheism is indeed akin to religion in the sense of ideology/worldview (because there's no God)
Shawn, I see atheism as a religion, because the very people that practice atheism, have create a dogma, whereby these individuals are willing to ridicule and harass others by name-calling, stalking, and harming others, over a belief system that includes the goal of not believing a deity. Modern atheism has become a religion, where there's a strong need to create "reason rallies (funded by atheist)", and the promotion of books regarding the subject; the result is a church of atheism(enterprise).
You are aware of agnostic atheists, right? You know, atheists who do not believe a god exists, but do not claim to know for certain that a god does not exist.
With your line of thinking that would be like the following example. Apples are fruit. Apples are red. there for all fruit are red. God is a belief. God is a religion. There for all beliefs are a religion. =false
I believe, by your given definition, that the next suggested video entitled "How to make Cake Pops" will be exponentially more beneficial than watching this video.
Are all beliefs religious in nature? Well, I believe that I'm a good person. Is this religious in nature? No...no it is not. Kid, you are embarrassing yourself.
If your favorite hockey team is the Toronto Maple Leafs then believing in them winning *is* religious since you would basically believe the impossible and it would take divine intervention in order to make it happen.
@theflarpus The issue with that is atheism 1. Does not need to disprove god bc there's no evidence of his existence. 2. Atheism is not a positive assertion and therefore doesn't take faith of any kind.
@kyekire I would still imagine that every athiest has a standard of proof needed in order to believe in a God and that standard varies from person to person. What is yours? In order for you to believe that a God exist. What is your standard?
Ah yes, we see this fucknut psychotic narcissitic delusional psychopath is still spewing circles of irrelevant verbiage. And still up to his cowardice practice of blocking users.
Oh Sean, when are you going to kill yourself.? Cmon... Don't you want to see Jeezus?
You can go ahead and block me now you pathetic coward Motherfucker.
This video is nothing but pseudophilosophy and an incoherent mess. Not only are your arguments completely flawed, they do not seem to be structured in any meaningful way at all. You have way overcomplicated something very simple, eg talking about "brain states" in terms of bottles of water. Whatever this means, it is in no way comparable or related to the question of whether atheism is a religion. When you make such a strange analogy, the onus is on you to explain why it makes sense to do so.
From what I have experienced in life, most people deny God because they can't make the bible or christian beliefs fit their lifestyle and they refuse to change, so they deny anything that condems their actions, even to the point of hunting down christian material on youtube and spreading their hatred of his laws and denying him in the hopes that others will do the same, and hoping that they will not have to bend that knee and answer to him in the end.
@Jejune72 No, most people deny god because the bible is very contradictory. Filled with Rape, Incest, Murder, and Genocide. From my experience, it doesn't matter if you're Christian, most "Christians" I know do drugs, drink, and have sex before marriage. Your argument is based off of ignorance.
@DonaldHellsing Sounds like you want to point the finger and accuse to strenghten your argument. Did anyone ever say there are not people who act like christians to achieve personal gain, no they didn't. So thats an excuse to slander christians, and a very weak one to be honest. You have already made up your mind, I hope you aquire an open mind one day and take it upon your self to read the bible for more than a reason to slander it.
@Jejune72 Open mind? I was Catholic for 14 years, don't tell me I don't have an open mind. I read the bible every day in bible school, which made me question my faith, then I chose atheism because it was the only logical choice. Don't give me that crap you hypocrite lol. You just did the exact same thing about Atheist.
I'll play your game. Let's say atheism is a religious belief. We still would not be Christians, still would go to hell with the majority of people that have ever lived according to you. It does not change anything and the Christian God would still imaginary to atheists. Labeling us as something we are not will not change anything. The emperor still have no clothes. What was the point of this video again?
My guess is the (unspoken but still vocal) point is "Atheism is a religion, so prove God doesn't exist or STFU".
Anyway, IMO there is no such thing as "religious belief". The adjective 'religious' is just a description, it doesn't change the nature of belief or change it's credibility.
There are just beliefs, and some of them happen to be part of religion.
"Atheism is a religion, so prove God doesn't exist or STFU"
If anyone wanted to be convinced the Christian God does not exist, they'd just have to see the constant dishonesty of VFX over the years. You can't believe God is watching you and be the lying snake that he is.
Food for thought: if atheism is a religion, then theism is a religion. Only it isn't: "theism" is too broad a label, much too vague to be a religion all its own. And the same thing with atheism. There are different types of atheists, and those who have certain atheist books and idols to look up to are often more than mere atheists: they are anti-theists. NOW we have narrowed it down to something which MIGHT be called religious, as they consider atheism to be a significant part of their identity.
You were doing so well too. You've got a fundamental problem with your analysis in that atheism and agnosticism deal with two different things. (A)theism deals with belief, (A)gnosticism with knowledge. Everyone lies on a 2-D plane defined by these terms giving 4 possible positions:
1. Gnostic Theist - I believe god exists and it can be proven
2. Agnostic Theist - I believe god exists but it can't be proven
3. Gnostic Atheist - I don't believe in god, and it can be proven
4. Agnostic Atheist - I don't believe in god, but I don't think it can be proven.
Categories 2 and 4 are by far the most common, with very few actually being in 1 or 3, though there are more 1s than 3s meaning the vast majority of atheists won't fall under religious even under your definition.
Also, knowledge of god is not innate. I was quite old before I'd even heard the word god, and older still before I knew what people meant by it. Before that I had no concept of god at all.
@VenomFangX Actually, you're wrong. Colour is perception. For example, a green book is not green when no one is looking because there is no one there to perceive it. What we normally refer to as colour are the perceived wavelengths of light For birds and many women (apologies for the somewhat dubious example) - ultra-violet is a colour (tetrachromacy), however we would normally regard it as merely light of super-colour frequency (again: perception).
@TheAthiCon An Atheist because you do not believe in any gods exist. If you also claim to know Gods do not exist, then you are a Gnostic Atheist, otherwise you are an Agnostic Atheist.
@TheAthiCon I understand VFX’s point of view, for many years he has said “I believe God exists”, and every time he has said this he has meant “I am 100% certain that God exists”.
So he assumes there are only three positions, knowing god exists, not knowing god exists, and knowing god does not exist.
And misses that people can believe or not believe in something without knowing.
@8CaptainHowdy Yeah, if you use Shawn's silly, silly definition of religion (which includes Congress). But by that definition, everyone is religious. If I say I'm a god, according to him, the only way someone can not be religious is say that they don't know if I'm not a god or not.
@VenomFangX actually black is a mix of all the other colours. A "black surface" absorbs all the different colours in the "spectra", thats why black surfaces in general get warmer in the sun than most other coloured surfaces....
@maax82 Actually no. Black is the lack of color. Black paint is actually dark green or dark brown for example, but it's not actually black. I learned this in art class when I was in middle school, and it was brought back up in painting class in collage. Even black hair isn't actually black. Black surfaces might absorb light, but that's irrelevant. They would be black surfaces even if there was no light to absorb. Google it sometime. Space is the only thing which is really black.
@VenomFangO Well no black is all the colours in dark objects all the colours are absorbed. in pigments it's the mixture of all the colours. In your art class try to mix black from the lack of colour. what you do is you mix colours to get what we call black usually the wavelengths that does make it to our eyes is a brownish slur or dark green, becasue as you say the only thing truly black is a "black hole"...
@VenomFangO What a silly thing to argue about, can I join in? Black is a shade yes, but it is also a colour depending on the context e.g. in the context of art when you add black to a colour you change the shade but the colour is essentially the same, yes
However if I was to ask what colour is your car? If your answer was colourless (because the car was black) then you missed the point of the question
@utubedetective72 Well the argument is only silly because it's an argument based on different views of the definition of "Colour". Much like this video an argument based on venomfangx having different definitions of words.
I’d say if Venom recognised that you can hold a belief without having 100% certainty, then he would not have made the same conclusions, and perhaps recognise that everyone is an: Agnostic Atheist, Gnostic Theist, Gnostic Atheist or Agnostic Theist.
@bradkey98765 yes I agree there is no essentially no difference between atheist and agnostic. Personally I wouldn't define either as a religion because this is not how they define themselves. However many atheists and agnostics act in a clearly religious manner. This is apparent by their choice of names that advertise their world view. It reminds me of Christians who have Christ in their names
p.s. I hope an intelligent atheist like urself wasn't correcting my spelling of colour?
@utubedetective72 But speaking of agnostics/atheists, I wasn’t saying they are the same. Some Atheists are not agnostic and some Theists are agnostic.
@maax82 You do not see the light that is absorbed by an object, you see the visible light that is reflected or emitted by it, which then reaches your eyes or eye.
@maax82 Well if you are going to say, black is a mixture of all colours, because a black surface absorbs all colours in the visible spectrum, then you should say, red is a mixture of orange, yellow, green, indigo and violet.
@bradkey98765 Yes that is what the pigmentation is made of just what venomfang got wrong. He said that there is no colour pigmentation of "black" and I said yes there is. Now for convenience we only refer the colour to the wavelenght we actually precieve with our eye like the "colour red" that is the only wavelength we recieve to our eye, but the colour consist of other so called "colours" (pigmentations) Now you are getting a hang of it :D
@Autumn6 But the sky isn’t blue, it is transparent, it just appears blue because shorter wavelengths of light are scattered more through the earth’s atmosphere than longer wavelengths of light.
Definition of atheism: lack of belief in a diety(s) Religion: organized faith in a supernatural power. I'm afraid atheism itself is not a religion, it isn't even a worldview.
@kyekire but if atheism cannot disprove God or a God or Gods....factually then it seems that one is taking a stand based on faith in their system. I don't know i am just wondering =)
@theflarpus If someone says, "there is definetely no god", then you are right, there is an element of faith in that claim. You will find, however, that most atheists have the view, "I lack belief in a god or gods because there is not sufficient evidence that one exists". While both of these people would be considered atheists, these statements are very different and the latter does not require any faith at all in my opinion.
@joshie92 Is the person who says there is not sufficient evidence that one exists. Is there an implication in that statement that evidence of one existing could avail itstelf?
@theflarpus This statement doesn't imply one way or the other whether evidence of a god could appear, it is irrelevant. An atheist who holds this view point is open to new evidence, however there is just as much chance of evidence of god appearing as there is for evidence of fairies or unicorns suddenly appearing. If god is supposed to be all knowing, surely he would be smart enough to provide us with a convincing reason to believe in him before he requires such a thing of us.
@joshie92 Also, to restate that statement in a more general sense; one should not believe in something unless there is a convincingly good reason to do so. This is mere logic and also why I think the concept of faith is a ridiculous and totally arbitrary way of deciding between what is real and what is imaginary.
@VenomFangX If there is no difference between religion and non-religion then it doesn't matter whether or not Atheism is a religion. You've answered your own question.
Rejecting a claim is not asserting a claim. Skepticism is not faith.
Also, acknowledging the possibility of being wrong is not the same as admitting an impossibility of knowing truth.
Semantics seem to drive these misunderstandings. You can define and redefine words but that doesn't change reality. PWNED
I don't care what combination of light or pigment creates black. What variety of attribute is black? It's a color. Every bit as much as pink, cyan or aquamarine. Just like zero is a number, a space is a character and Michael Bay is a director. The focus on lack of substance doesn't negate what they are.
@VenomFangX Actually, black is the mixture of all colors, while white is the absence of color, and so yes black is indeed a color. You're thinking of light, where black is the absence and white is the mixture.
@gotafakename That's if you're talking about paint or something. If you're talking about light then Shawn is right. It is an absense of color. Either way it's irrelevant because Atheism isn't a belief system. I as an Atheist don't believe that God doesn't exist. I lack belief that he does. There's a difference.
@kilroy227 yes thats what i said, except no if its light its not an absence of color, its an absence of light, black is the color of something that absorbs all spectrums of light. and to your other point its a very, very fine line which is entirely baed in semantics and means nothing one way or the other. there is no difference between not believing in god and believing that god doesnt exist, since they both end up being the same thing.
@VenomFangX if we define agnostic as “Not knowing whether there is or is not a god”, and Atheist as “Not believing there is a god”. Would you accept someone being both Agnostic and an Atheist as a legitimate position? (In the same way you may not know whether your mother is at the store, but believe that she isn’t).
labels like agnostic and atheist have no power over me. they mean nothing. Just like how "homophobic" is a word made up by gays to make you feel bad about not liking them.
I'll also say, my definition of a relgious belief is a belief in somthing supernatural. And so my belief that there is not a supernatural god is not a religious belief.
Welcome back Venomfangx, I am an atheist and I am fairly happy with this video. And I praise you for keeping comments open.
I am happy that you kept this as an argument about the definition of words, since that is all that it really is. Though I will say an agnostic is someone who does not know whether a god exists, and an atheist does not believe a god exists. By those definitions I am an agnostic atheist.
If there is no difference between religion and non-religion then it doesn't matter whether or not Atheism is a religion. You've answered your own question.
Rejecting a claim is not asserting a claim. Skepticism is not faith.
Also, acknowledging the possibility of being wrong is not the same as admitting an impossibility of knowing truth.
Semantics seem to drive these misunderstandings. You can define and redefine words but that doesn't change reality.
@eggnogs I think you should be less mean. I mean where are your parents? Hasn't your mother taught you that you shouldn't be mean or rude to other people?
Atheism is perhaps the belief that scientific discoveries are the only means through which mankind can learn about reality, but the word "scientist" is already taken, as christians can be scientists too. I don't know if atheism is a religious belief/faith, but it is still a belief/faith. I often find myself making up scientific explanations for things I can't explain, and while these explanations might be completely wrong even in the eyes of science, I have faith in them at that moment.
While I'm open to a lot of "leading YouTube atheists" (if that isn't giving them too much credit) taking a stance against christianity simply because they're secretly homosexual, I'm personally not an atheist because I hate God. If there's anything I would hate him for, it'd be that he hasn't given people enough reasons to believe in him. I'm an atheist because to me a world without (at least a christian) god makes more sense, and my best friend is a christian, and I'm a big fan of you as well.
Since so many people have started claiming that our lack of religion is in itself a religion, why argue? lets just go with it. I'd love to see a Church of Atheism. A place we can go to just hang out. who's with me?!!?
Atheism may not be a "religion" by definition (same with Theism)
But the "actions" of many atheists state otherwise, cf. Atheist Conventions, burning bibles, Anti-theistic propaganda, destruction of church property etc.
Atheism is very special compared to Asportfanism.
Naturalism which is fully compatible IS a quasi religion in itself and asserts that nature is all there is. Nature did it!
You really are brainwashed, ANY atheist that commits to naturalism entials NO GOD.
Naturalism = nature did it, and nature is all there is, therefore no God. This is a TRUTH Claim
So you are another example of a village atheist that is nothing more than a layman in philsophy and you can't think for yourself.
Anyways, I always wondered why atheists have atheist conventions, but we never see non-mechanics have non-mechanic conventions..so what makes atheism so special?
8:53 heh, but they never are. the identity principle falls apart when multiple people/definitions are involved. it isn't a logical difference between atheism and theism, it is a functional difference. theists experience all sorts of strange phenomena as part of god, some (claim to) experience pleasure or euphoria in the 'presence of god'. atheists still experience pleasure, but not due to the lack of cause.
lol, i didn't know what god was until it was defined... pretty good argument overall.
So based on your definition of a religion, any such gathering of people assenting to an idea with authoritative books guiding their teachings is a religion. So science is a religion too? Science has people gathering, they assent to the principles of cause and effect and so on. They have authoritative books. Your arguments are riddled with illogical nonsense and non sequitur.
northcedarpk 13 hours ago
I was following the difference between the two statements, and while I disagree to some degree(lol), you lost credibility when you tried to turn agnosticism into an alternative for atheism. If you read the definitions you provided you clearly note the differentiating characteristic between agnosticism and atheism. Agnosticism unambiguously deals with KNOWLEDGE, whether god's existence is knowable, and atheism deals with BELIEF. It's possible to be one or both, they are not mutually exclusive.
ReverendWyrm 1 day ago
You assume that atheism is the sole commitment to an affirmation that god does not exist exist despite potential evidence that it may. In that sense and with that definition your analysis if correct. However I think your definition is ill affirmed
I contend that opening oneself the the possibility that god may exist should he make himself known does not make them any less of an atheist. Consider the following statement:
'I believe based on my reasonable analysis that god does not exist.'
servitup21 1 day ago
Atheism is a question of belief, agnosticism is a question of knowledge. Those definitions are not accurate. Atheism is a lack of belief, agnosticism is a lack of knowledge. You might want to check multiple sources & see if any disagree with you before you're an idiot.
atnorman369 6 days ago
cant reason with people that dont know the correct definitions... @uscjd2004 @Pirate44444 you know^^^^ those people
xxSuperNoVa103xx 1 week ago
Remember Shawn, that games are actually representations of sex magic. It is highly religious, because the "ball", is actually coming from "Ba'al", and you have symbols that are related to vaginas and penises, and balls. The objective of a game (gaymen) is to score inside a hole. But remember than the gayman (game), can not double dribbling, because they is considered "foul." The men that are Gaymen of the game, are symbolic games (sperm), who traverse in the creation of life personified.
DemocraticEmpire 1 week ago
Non-religious non-theist is quite a mouthful, and since practically no one actually has the BELIEF that there is no god, why not just use the word atheist for all of that? No, of course, theists won't let us. I don't believe there is a god, I don't believe there isn't, I have no beliefs regarding the existence of god. Just accept this. Stop using semantics to insist that I do. It's pathetic.
Pirate44444 1 week ago
The last point you made is very well made.. :)
Mekelsior 1 week ago
Atheism is the absence of religion, so therefore is not a religion. Evolutionism(one who believes in evolution) is a religion
xxSuperNoVa103xx 1 week ago
@xxSuperNoVa103xx "evolutionism" is not a religion. There is no dogma, no doctrine, no worship, no rituals, no god, no supernatural occurrences, no sacred texts and most importantly NO FAITH. Evolution is based on evidence and reasoning.
Pirate44444 1 week ago
@xxSuperNoVa103xx Wrong. There are mountains of evidence supporting the theory of evolution. It's science, not faith. Drop the sophistry and perhaps someday you might be worth taking seriously.
uscjd2004 1 week ago
Very valid points. Thanks.
brantk81 1 week ago
Your absurdity is growing... So, by your logic everyone who rejects the claim of any given group is automatically part of that group in some fashion. I really don't want to consider the level of dimness that you present to be real, however, I can't deny the reality that you are displaying of actual dimness...:(
MyContext 1 week ago
lol whut?
Imatallguy1 1 week ago
@designsens. Just because some Christian judge in the USA said it's a religion, doesn't make it so... We live on a planet and its not called the USA. MORON
bigjustin69er 1 week ago
Yes I know I should'be written "no" instead of "know".You see what happens when idiots like this talk... you get a headache and things get messed up.
bigjustin69er 1 week ago
I'm an atheist. I don't say if I believe or don't believe. I say "I KNOW THERE IS KNOW RELIGION"... so, what do we learn from this? Simple.. You,are an Almighty CLUSTERFUCK of retarded Jesus vomit
bigjustin69er 1 week ago
You have just left yourself wide open for ridicule. You're going to have to watch every single word you say. Look up the defenition for religion... how the hell can you call atheists religion. Retard
bigjustin69er 1 week ago
"I do not believe that there is a ping pong paddle in front of me, now I know there is one in front of me."
FTFY
V2Hovership 2 weeks ago
Atheism is legally a religion in the US as per
U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh District Circuit Court,
Chief Judge: Crabb
Circuit Judges: Bauer, Wood, Williams
Kaufman v. McCaughtry
Document 04-1914; Aug 19,2005.
DesignSens 2 weeks ago
@DesignSens More proof that, given enough time, a group of lawyers could muck up practically anything.
uscjd2004 2 weeks ago
@uscjd2004
"a group of lawyers could muck up practically anything".
They already have. In the United States the question as to whether or not Atheism is religion has been settled. It has been legally recognized as a religion. So the question as to is it a religion by the theology argument becomes moot.
maximusjay 1 week ago
@maximusjay Settled? That's hilarious. Atheism is a religion in the same way that being a non-stamp collector is a hobby. I don't view reality through the lens of legal opinion. Judged by the collective intelligence of my c/o 2004 JD classmates, it's not a pretty picture. According to precedent, corporations are now considered to be people for the purpose of political contributions. This is the sort of twisted logic that one often finds in the law. It always must be taken with a grain of salt.
uscjd2004 1 week ago
@uscjd2004
The legal term is "Corporate personhood" when you refer to corporations being treated as natural persons. It is not a new concept, it was legally recognized back in 1819. A federal court of appeals ruled in 2005 that atheism is a religion, however the belief that it is a religion may far predate corporations by centuries. So it is not a new concept either. There is no sense arguing about a proven fact. As far as the Law is concerned it is a religion. Eats you up doesn't it.
maximusjay 6 days ago
@maximusjay Do you really expect to pass off such paltry logic? The state of our affairs is not composed of a series of mere legal precedents. Only the most abject of imbeciles could maintain that non-belief in the supernatural (the usual basic proposition espoused by those referred to colloquially as "atheists"), more properly referred to as "materialism," is a religion. Religion involves a suspension of disbelief at some level. Materialism is the diametrically opposed position. QED.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
Paltry logic? Lol... State of affairs? Lol... Is that your brief? The case has been decided. You lost. Atheism is a belief, the details of which are taught and discussed; therefore it is a RELIGION. Don't believe me? Take it up with the US Supreme Court...You know...that group of (how did you put it?) oh yea...imbeciles? Lol... Spend some time in front of the looking glass silly. Oh and God Bless...
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay If you are unable to determine the clear difference between a legal precedent and an existential stance based upon the available evidence, I'm afraid there may be no help for you.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@maximusjay The proposition for which you advocate is positively idiotic. Take that up with stupid voters who elect stupid presidents who select stupid justices.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
It is not a justice system, it is a judicial system. Therefore it matters not what your opinion is. You belong to a legally recognized Religion. That is that fact Jack. Now does that not tie your panties into a knot? You don't like the designation? Why don't you move to Canada. As long as you are here then you can soak of the designation. You are the member of a Religion. Your namby-pamby philosophies are therefore rendered moot.
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay More of the same casuistry, poor logic, red herrings, and appeals to authority (which, as it turns out, you don't even properly understand -- you'd do well to actually read the 7th Circuit's opinion in that case). The plaintiff framed the issue in terms of religion only for legalistic reasons, not for logical ones, and his strategy worked -- he and his secular comrades ultimately were allowed to meet because the prison's prohibition was shown to fail the Lemon test.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
So you can read. Good for you. The fact still stands that the court agreed in that case that Atheism is a religion. Case closed.
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay The court's opinion doesn't comport with reason or observed reality. Rely on it if you must in order to get your deranged kicks, but understand that nobody with a healthy, functioning brain operates in this fashion.
BTW, the term "atheism" was first put to use by the ancient Greeks in reference to Christians and others who did not believe in the Pantheon.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
"understand that nobody with a healthy, functioning brain operates in this fashion"
Co 1:27 "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise…" Thanks for reminding me again. God Bless
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay Circular reasoning ("the Bible is true because it says it's true"), argument from authority, etc. The citation of ancient scriptures gets you exactly nowhere. The next time you accuse someone of employing fallacious reasoning, make sure you haven't littered your own comments with such bunkum.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
"the Bible is true because it says it's true"
Ignorant statement by someone who has no Faith in Jesus, has never studied the Bible or the history and archeology of it. You are however a hypocrite, as your basing your faith in your religion on the fact that you can only believe in what you can see and comprehend.
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay I have studied the Bible and have read lots of the associated scholarly literature. Also, I have studied the Qur'an, The Upanishads, The Ramayana, The Bhagavad Gita, The Analects, The Daodejing, The Enuma Elis, and many other so-called "sacred" texts. None are useful in the least in the 21st century. These texts come from the terrified and ignorant infancy of our species. Modern scientific discovery and secular morality are exponentially superior to the "wisdom" of the ancients.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
"I have studied the Bible and have read lots of the associated scholarly literature"
Okay for starters then tell me why the Jews and the Moslems don't get along.
maximusjay 4 days ago
@maximusjay You know full well that question is well beyond the efficacy of YouTube comments, but the modern (short) answer is Zionism. The ancient (short) answer is the disposition/ownership of The Temple Mount/al-Aqsa.
uscjd2004 4 days ago
@uscjd2004
What is the root of "Zionism"?
maximusjay 1 day ago
@uscjd2004
What is the root of "Zionism"?
maximusjay 1 day ago
@maximusjay Those of us who are normal have a term to describe others who base their relationship with reality upon unseen metaphysical forces -- "candidates for inpatient therapy."
uscjd2004 4 days ago
@uscjd2004
"Those of us who are normal" That requires a belief.
maximusjay 4 days ago
@maximusjay No, it doesn't. It requires an absence of delusion -- robust mental health, in other words -- which no genuinely religious or superstitious person can claim.
uscjd2004 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@uscjd2004
"BTW, the term "atheism" was first put to use by the ancient Greeks in reference to Christians and others who did not believe in the Pantheon"
And you are using this to prove your point?
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay Anyone who would call an air-tight logical argument "namby-pamby" does not deserve the privilege of engaging in discourse with me. Until you can show via logic and evidence that a person's failure to collect stamps makes him a hobbyist, then you have no argument here. You infantile godbots have been losing ground for hundreds of years; expect it to continue.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
You want logic? Okay: It all boils down to this. For me and the Christian world out there, this life is not the end. You should have no problem with that. For you and your fellow religious fanatics, it all ends here. I have no problem with that. So we have common ground. If you are serious about the godbot comment I find it ironic in that you have swallowed the company line, hook, line and sinker. I however follow no religious leader because I actually understand. God Bless.
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay What callow piffle you continue to spew. There is no company line because, surprise! -- non-belief is not a religion -- it is simply the customary existential stance assumed by those who possess and utilize healthy, normal, untrammeled intellectual capabilities. It is the null hypothesis. It is what you believed before the theocratic succubus sunk her fangs into you. I hope someday you can summon the strength of character required to cast off your imaginary bondage.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@uscjd2004
Here is some more immature dribble for you to confound you. To believe in nothing is to believe in something. "I hope someday you can summon the strength of character required to cast off your imaginary bondage" From your lips to God's ears. God Bless
maximusjay 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
"a person's failure to collect stamps makes him a hobbyist, then you have no argument here".
Straw man argument.
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay Incorrect. The analogy is entirely on point. Predictably, you either do not understand what comprises a straw man argument or deliberately misuse the term. "Atheism" implies skepticism with respect to certain ontological and existential claims and non-participation in certain activities. There's no affirmative content. Religions, conversely, are organized around affirmative declarations of belief and participation in certain rituals. The distinction could not be clearer.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
@uscjd2004
You have proven that you are using the straw man argument silly. Why don't you edjikate mi...
maximusjay 5 days ago
@maximusjay I haven't used a straw man argument because I have not misrepresented your position. You claim that a court's decision is the ultimate arbiter of reality. This is patently untrue. You also make the nonsensical claim that non-participation in certain activities and non-assent to certain propositions somehow makes one a member of the category populated by affirmative participants and believers. One must either be intentionally mendacious or mentally unsound to make such inane claims.
uscjd2004 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@uscjd2004
"I haven't used a straw man argument because I have not misrepresented your position" Oh? You were not substituting stamp collecting as an argument that you thought you could easily defeat to represent the argument for no religion? If you can expand outside the box, can you limited me to it?
maximusjay 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@5:50 "maybe atheists hate God."
Speaking for myself. I hate your God at a level that I would hate a bad guy in any other book. In reality you can't hate someone that does not evidentially exist. How can you wish someone dead that never existed in the first place? That is moronic. So NO, atheists DO NOT hate your God, only his character in your mythology. As for atheists "hating" Christians - no. Do we think you are deluded? 100%
SupaShang 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
SupaShang 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
SupaShang 2 weeks ago
Also, just because you believe in something does not make it a religion, I'm sure you believe in gravity but does that mean you religiously believe in gravity? Oh and here is a definition of religion for you: The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
333MJH 2 weeks ago
I'm not saying that there is absolutely no God or Gods, I'm just saying I do not believe in the existence of all the Gods that humans currently worship and believe in.
333MJH 2 weeks ago
@333MJH That's the correct position -- the "null hypothesis." The study of nature reveals a very strong bias against the existence of the supernatural, but it is impossible to disprove that which is unfalsifiable.
uscjd2004 2 weeks ago
why so many dislikes??? this guy is very well spoken
bobcatallstar7 2 weeks ago
@bobcatallstar7 His conclusions are idiotic, that's why. Any fool can offer well-enunciated canards.
uscjd2004 2 weeks ago
Amen, brother Shawn. Keep preaching the word of YHWH!!! (:
LMR5878 3 weeks ago
They BELIEVE in what they believe to be fact. Agnostics are just like "meh" idc.
masterskyrunner 3 weeks ago
AGNOSIS is not a religion, because it is indecision. Atheism is because it is an ideology that you proport and lift up with a usual scientific belief.
masterskyrunner 3 weeks ago
Venom, venom venom. I agreed with you until 4:45 when you called me agnostic. Im sure you have heard this before but, are you agnostic towards Santa. No. You are atheist towards Santa however you must remain open to the possiblity as you cant prove he doesn't exist. The atheistt states "I do not beleive that there is a god however if you were to provide scientific evidence then I would believe." An agnostic states "I dont know if there is a god or not."
RapeJesusWithAStick 3 weeks ago
"atheism is a religious position" - atheist Rik Pinxten, author of, The Creation of God
atheism declared a religion - United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Aug. 2005
I identify myself as an atheist, but a religious atheist. - James A. Haught, Freethought Today, June/July 2004.
The anti-religious atheist is the inspired prophet of a new religious movement. - atheist Zac Alstin,
BT3701 3 weeks ago
Granted a broad definition of religion (cult or ideology) - ranging from Buddhism, Greek mythology, to Wiccanism or what have you - what you say makes perfect sense that only fundamentalists from atheistic camp will fervently deny:
1) If There's no God, then all religions are false, i.e. worldviews that metamorphosed into ideology
2) (New) Atheism is a worldview which is transmuting into an ideology
3) Atheism is indeed akin to religion in the sense of ideology/worldview (because there's no God)
pawsoned 3 weeks ago
Shawn, I see atheism as a religion, because the very people that practice atheism, have create a dogma, whereby these individuals are willing to ridicule and harass others by name-calling, stalking, and harming others, over a belief system that includes the goal of not believing a deity. Modern atheism has become a religion, where there's a strong need to create "reason rallies (funded by atheist)", and the promotion of books regarding the subject; the result is a church of atheism(enterprise).
DemocraticEmpire 3 weeks ago
God doesn't exist, because if he did, you wouldn't.
okychky 4 weeks ago
You and Pat Condell should just make out already and get it over with.
gangurobitch 4 weeks ago
You are aware of agnostic atheists, right? You know, atheists who do not believe a god exists, but do not claim to know for certain that a god does not exist.
AzazelsSon 1 month ago
ones belife is based on opinion not their knowlage of proper grammer
rolyatruobrab 1 month ago
Why did you title your video "Atheism is NOT a religion" if the point you were making is the opposite?
KezoZydis 1 month ago
@KezoZydis Because there are many Darwinists who do the same. Leave misleading titles.
JamesRideout123 3 weeks ago
why does this have so much dislikes
matzoball101 1 month ago
Comment removed
Oohsnappydude 1 month ago
Comment removed
Oohsnappydude 1 month ago
Comment removed
Oohsnappydude 1 month ago
I do not believe Shawn is back.
I must be religious.
Pixiesmith1988 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
With your line of thinking that would be like the following example. Apples are fruit. Apples are red. there for all fruit are red. God is a belief. God is a religion. There for all beliefs are a religion. =false
Malady41 1 month ago
Comment removed
Malady41 1 month ago
I believe, by your given definition, that the next suggested video entitled "How to make Cake Pops" will be exponentially more beneficial than watching this video.
reamsauce 1 month ago
666 dislikes!
Skepgnostic 1 month ago
Are all beliefs religious in nature? Well, I believe that I'm a good person. Is this religious in nature? No...no it is not. Kid, you are embarrassing yourself.
Skepgnostic 1 month ago
Narcissistic personality disorder: You has it!
Skepgnostic 1 month ago
If your favorite hockey team is the Toronto Maple Leafs then believing in them winning *is* religious since you would basically believe the impossible and it would take divine intervention in order to make it happen.
MontrealAtheist 1 month ago
@theflarpus My standard would just be any unambiguous objectively verifiable evidence for the existence of a god.
kyekire 1 month ago
@kyekire Hypothetically of course. How might the Christian God fall into that category? What would that look like to you?
theflarpus 1 month ago
Atheism is a religion based on faith.
AtheistSpanker 1 month ago
@theflarpus The issue with that is atheism 1. Does not need to disprove god bc there's no evidence of his existence. 2. Atheism is not a positive assertion and therefore doesn't take faith of any kind.
kyekire 1 month ago
@kyekire I would still imagine that every athiest has a standard of proof needed in order to believe in a God and that standard varies from person to person. What is yours? In order for you to believe that a God exist. What is your standard?
theflarpus 1 month ago
When you block me, I'll know you've read this... good enough for me.
It just proves again.... what a coward shit spewing, stealing-from-children pathetic liar you are.
nolobede2 1 month ago
Ah yes, we see this fucknut psychotic narcissitic delusional psychopath is still spewing circles of irrelevant verbiage. And still up to his cowardice practice of blocking users.
Oh Sean, when are you going to kill yourself.? Cmon... Don't you want to see Jeezus?
You can go ahead and block me now you pathetic coward Motherfucker.
nolobede2 1 month ago
All you need is basic logic and you can answer this question quite simply.
1. Religion is a set of beliefs about the universe and reality based on the existence of a higher power, god or gods
2. Atheism is a lack of belief, disbelief or rejection of the idea that a higher power, god or gods exist
3. Therefore atheism cannot be considered a religion
Even with variations of these definitions I find it difficult to see how a logical person could possibly argue that atheism is a religion.
joshie92 1 month ago
This video is nothing but pseudophilosophy and an incoherent mess. Not only are your arguments completely flawed, they do not seem to be structured in any meaningful way at all. You have way overcomplicated something very simple, eg talking about "brain states" in terms of bottles of water. Whatever this means, it is in no way comparable or related to the question of whether atheism is a religion. When you make such a strange analogy, the onus is on you to explain why it makes sense to do so.
joshie92 1 month ago
@VenomFangX I am an agnostic-atheist as I don't have a theism.
But I do believe you're still a jackass who shouldn't be back here because of your past with false flagging.
scullkrusher 1 month ago
From what I have experienced in life, most people deny God because they can't make the bible or christian beliefs fit their lifestyle and they refuse to change, so they deny anything that condems their actions, even to the point of hunting down christian material on youtube and spreading their hatred of his laws and denying him in the hopes that others will do the same, and hoping that they will not have to bend that knee and answer to him in the end.
Jejune72 1 month ago
@Jejune72 No, most people deny god because the bible is very contradictory. Filled with Rape, Incest, Murder, and Genocide. From my experience, it doesn't matter if you're Christian, most "Christians" I know do drugs, drink, and have sex before marriage. Your argument is based off of ignorance.
DonaldHellsing 1 month ago
@DonaldHellsing Sounds like you want to point the finger and accuse to strenghten your argument. Did anyone ever say there are not people who act like christians to achieve personal gain, no they didn't. So thats an excuse to slander christians, and a very weak one to be honest. You have already made up your mind, I hope you aquire an open mind one day and take it upon your self to read the bible for more than a reason to slander it.
Jejune72 1 month ago
@Jejune72 Open mind? I was Catholic for 14 years, don't tell me I don't have an open mind. I read the bible every day in bible school, which made me question my faith, then I chose atheism because it was the only logical choice. Don't give me that crap you hypocrite lol. You just did the exact same thing about Atheist.
DonaldHellsing 1 month ago
I'll play your game. Let's say atheism is a religious belief. We still would not be Christians, still would go to hell with the majority of people that have ever lived according to you. It does not change anything and the Christian God would still imaginary to atheists. Labeling us as something we are not will not change anything. The emperor still have no clothes. What was the point of this video again?
rareblackatheist 1 month ago
@rareblackatheist
My guess is the (unspoken but still vocal) point is "Atheism is a religion, so prove God doesn't exist or STFU".
Anyway, IMO there is no such thing as "religious belief". The adjective 'religious' is just a description, it doesn't change the nature of belief or change it's credibility.
There are just beliefs, and some of them happen to be part of religion.
skewCZ 1 month ago
@skewCZ
"Atheism is a religion, so prove God doesn't exist or STFU"
If anyone wanted to be convinced the Christian God does not exist, they'd just have to see the constant dishonesty of VFX over the years. You can't believe God is watching you and be the lying snake that he is.
rareblackatheist 1 month ago
@hznfrst i second this notion.
JonnoXD 1 month ago
Food for thought: if atheism is a religion, then theism is a religion. Only it isn't: "theism" is too broad a label, much too vague to be a religion all its own. And the same thing with atheism. There are different types of atheists, and those who have certain atheist books and idols to look up to are often more than mere atheists: they are anti-theists. NOW we have narrowed it down to something which MIGHT be called religious, as they consider atheism to be a significant part of their identity.
Gilmaris 1 month ago
You were doing so well too. You've got a fundamental problem with your analysis in that atheism and agnosticism deal with two different things. (A)theism deals with belief, (A)gnosticism with knowledge. Everyone lies on a 2-D plane defined by these terms giving 4 possible positions:
1. Gnostic Theist - I believe god exists and it can be proven
2. Agnostic Theist - I believe god exists but it can't be proven
3. Gnostic Atheist - I don't believe in god, and it can be proven
(cont)
FireDragons42 1 month ago
(cont)
4. Agnostic Atheist - I don't believe in god, but I don't think it can be proven.
Categories 2 and 4 are by far the most common, with very few actually being in 1 or 3, though there are more 1s than 3s meaning the vast majority of atheists won't fall under religious even under your definition.
Also, knowledge of god is not innate. I was quite old before I'd even heard the word god, and older still before I knew what people meant by it. Before that I had no concept of god at all.
FireDragons42 1 month ago
Religion:"The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods" (Google Definitions)
Atheism does not comply with this definition, it is not a religion. I also point out that even Richard Dawkins does not say he KNOWS there is no god.
imconfusednow 1 month ago
@VenomFangX and so is white and anyways life is not about black and white but you think differently you think through your ass VenomFangX
jpbarbedwire666 1 month ago
Helen did not born blind, deaf and mute. She got a disease when she was a infant. And she was not mute.
jccjccjoanne 1 month ago
@VenomFangX Actually, you're wrong. Colour is perception. For example, a green book is not green when no one is looking because there is no one there to perceive it. What we normally refer to as colour are the perceived wavelengths of light For birds and many women (apologies for the somewhat dubious example) - ultra-violet is a colour (tetrachromacy), however we would normally regard it as merely light of super-colour frequency (again: perception).
Black is the absence of light; not colour.
LucidCatnap 1 month ago
IF you press most non-beleivers, they are agnostic atheists.
Atheism isn't a worldview though?!
It is simply one answer on one question, the existence of God.
That is why an atheist can be of any political background, be pro-life or pro-chooice and may have any number of moral stances.
The uploader missed the point entirely.
moroney1 1 month ago
I do not believe in any gods and I believe your god does not exist. What does that make me?
TheAthiCon 1 month ago
@TheAthiCon An Atheist because you do not believe in any gods exist. If you also claim to know Gods do not exist, then you are a Gnostic Atheist, otherwise you are an Agnostic Atheist.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
@bradkey98765 I know, but according to VFX that is not possible.
TheAthiCon 1 month ago
@TheAthiCon I understand VFX’s point of view, for many years he has said “I believe God exists”, and every time he has said this he has meant “I am 100% certain that God exists”.
So he assumes there are only three positions, knowing god exists, not knowing god exists, and knowing god does not exist.
And misses that people can believe or not believe in something without knowing.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
@TheAthiCon
A religious person, because you still BELIEVE in something that has to do with theology: unbelief in its relevance.
8CaptainHowdy 1 month ago
@8CaptainHowdy Yeah, if you use Shawn's silly, silly definition of religion (which includes Congress). But by that definition, everyone is religious. If I say I'm a god, according to him, the only way someone can not be religious is say that they don't know if I'm not a god or not.
TheAthiCon 1 month ago
Very nice title bro. I only just got it the joke lol. Your next vid should be called:
Evolution is a FACT
utubedetective72 1 month ago
Excellent video. I had the view, but couldn't articulate it... makes a great deal of sense.
studentofthegospel 1 month ago
@VenomFangX actually black is a mix of all the other colours. A "black surface" absorbs all the different colours in the "spectra", thats why black surfaces in general get warmer in the sun than most other coloured surfaces....
maax82 1 month ago
@maax82 Actually no. Black is the lack of color. Black paint is actually dark green or dark brown for example, but it's not actually black. I learned this in art class when I was in middle school, and it was brought back up in painting class in collage. Even black hair isn't actually black. Black surfaces might absorb light, but that's irrelevant. They would be black surfaces even if there was no light to absorb. Google it sometime. Space is the only thing which is really black.
VenomFangO 1 month ago
@VenomFangO Well no black is all the colours in dark objects all the colours are absorbed. in pigments it's the mixture of all the colours. In your art class try to mix black from the lack of colour. what you do is you mix colours to get what we call black usually the wavelengths that does make it to our eyes is a brownish slur or dark green, becasue as you say the only thing truly black is a "black hole"...
maax82 1 month ago
@VenomFangO What a silly thing to argue about, can I join in? Black is a shade yes, but it is also a colour depending on the context e.g. in the context of art when you add black to a colour you change the shade but the colour is essentially the same, yes
However if I was to ask what colour is your car? If your answer was colourless (because the car was black) then you missed the point of the question
utubedetective72 1 month ago
@utubedetective72 Well the argument is only silly because it's an argument based on different views of the definition of "Colour". Much like this video an argument based on venomfangx having different definitions of words.
I’d say if Venom recognised that you can hold a belief without having 100% certainty, then he would not have made the same conclusions, and perhaps recognise that everyone is an: Agnostic Atheist, Gnostic Theist, Gnostic Atheist or Agnostic Theist.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
@bradkey98765 yes I agree there is no essentially no difference between atheist and agnostic. Personally I wouldn't define either as a religion because this is not how they define themselves. However many atheists and agnostics act in a clearly religious manner. This is apparent by their choice of names that advertise their world view. It reminds me of Christians who have Christ in their names
p.s. I hope an intelligent atheist like urself wasn't correcting my spelling of colour?
utubedetective72 1 month ago
@utubedetective72 Quotes are also used to show a difference between, when you are using a word/phrase or simply mentioning it.
Example:
Use- Cheese is made from milk.
Mention- “Cheese” has three “e’s”.
So I wasn't citing your spelling of "colour" (which is actually the same as mine), I just automatically tend to add quotes when mentioning words.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
@utubedetective72 But speaking of agnostics/atheists, I wasn’t saying they are the same. Some Atheists are not agnostic and some Theists are agnostic.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
Comment removed
bradkey98765 1 month ago
@maax82 You do not see the light that is absorbed by an object, you see the visible light that is reflected or emitted by it, which then reaches your eyes or eye.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
@bradkey98765 No ! Since the object is black it emitts no light, thus giving it their black surface every colour is absorbed. For the truly black....
maax82 1 month ago
@maax82 Well if you are going to say, black is a mixture of all colours, because a black surface absorbs all colours in the visible spectrum, then you should say, red is a mixture of orange, yellow, green, indigo and violet.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
@bradkey98765 Yes that is what the pigmentation is made of just what venomfang got wrong. He said that there is no colour pigmentation of "black" and I said yes there is. Now for convenience we only refer the colour to the wavelenght we actually precieve with our eye like the "colour red" that is the only wavelength we recieve to our eye, but the colour consist of other so called "colours" (pigmentations) Now you are getting a hang of it :D
maax82 1 month ago
I think if VFX came on here and said the sky was blue, you guys would find reasons to diss him. lol.
Autumn6 1 month ago
@Autumn6 But the sky isn’t blue, it is transparent, it just appears blue because shorter wavelengths of light are scattered more through the earth’s atmosphere than longer wavelengths of light.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
If all beliefs are religeous then it requires all beliefs to be in a god, however we can believe in things other than god can't we?
kyekire 1 month ago
Definition of atheism: lack of belief in a diety(s) Religion: organized faith in a supernatural power. I'm afraid atheism itself is not a religion, it isn't even a worldview.
kyekire 1 month ago
@kyekire Let him have his little wordgame video. It only has any relevance to other religious people who are already convinced anyway.
taffwob 1 month ago
@kyekire but if atheism cannot disprove God or a God or Gods....factually then it seems that one is taking a stand based on faith in their system. I don't know i am just wondering =)
theflarpus 1 month ago
@theflarpus If someone says, "there is definetely no god", then you are right, there is an element of faith in that claim. You will find, however, that most atheists have the view, "I lack belief in a god or gods because there is not sufficient evidence that one exists". While both of these people would be considered atheists, these statements are very different and the latter does not require any faith at all in my opinion.
joshie92 1 month ago
@joshie92 Is the person who says there is not sufficient evidence that one exists. Is there an implication in that statement that evidence of one existing could avail itstelf?
theflarpus 1 month ago
@theflarpus This statement doesn't imply one way or the other whether evidence of a god could appear, it is irrelevant. An atheist who holds this view point is open to new evidence, however there is just as much chance of evidence of god appearing as there is for evidence of fairies or unicorns suddenly appearing. If god is supposed to be all knowing, surely he would be smart enough to provide us with a convincing reason to believe in him before he requires such a thing of us.
joshie92 1 month ago
@joshie92 Also, to restate that statement in a more general sense; one should not believe in something unless there is a convincingly good reason to do so. This is mere logic and also why I think the concept of faith is a ridiculous and totally arbitrary way of deciding between what is real and what is imaginary.
joshie92 1 month ago
Religion of atheism.
Quite interesting and clear
Jondadon2006 1 month ago
As for you shawn... there is such things as agnostic theists AND agnostic atheists
kilroy227 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@VenomFangX If there is no difference between religion and non-religion then it doesn't matter whether or not Atheism is a religion. You've answered your own question.
Rejecting a claim is not asserting a claim. Skepticism is not faith.
Also, acknowledging the possibility of being wrong is not the same as admitting an impossibility of knowing truth.
Semantics seem to drive these misunderstandings. You can define and redefine words but that doesn't change reality. PWNED
HellisListening1 1 month ago
@VenomFangX
I don't care what combination of light or pigment creates black. What variety of attribute is black? It's a color. Every bit as much as pink, cyan or aquamarine. Just like zero is a number, a space is a character and Michael Bay is a director. The focus on lack of substance doesn't negate what they are.
Orenotter 1 month ago
So what is grey? This is not a joke or anything.
121GOODNEWSITSMONDAY 1 month ago
@VenomFangX Actually, black is the mixture of all colors, while white is the absence of color, and so yes black is indeed a color. You're thinking of light, where black is the absence and white is the mixture.
gotafakename 1 month ago
@gotafakename That's if you're talking about paint or something. If you're talking about light then Shawn is right. It is an absense of color. Either way it's irrelevant because Atheism isn't a belief system. I as an Atheist don't believe that God doesn't exist. I lack belief that he does. There's a difference.
kilroy227 1 month ago
@kilroy227 yes thats what i said, except no if its light its not an absence of color, its an absence of light, black is the color of something that absorbs all spectrums of light. and to your other point its a very, very fine line which is entirely baed in semantics and means nothing one way or the other. there is no difference between not believing in god and believing that god doesnt exist, since they both end up being the same thing.
gotafakename 1 month ago
@VenomFangX if we define agnostic as “Not knowing whether there is or is not a god”, and Atheist as “Not believing there is a god”. Would you accept someone being both Agnostic and an Atheist as a legitimate position? (In the same way you may not know whether your mother is at the store, but believe that she isn’t).
bradkey98765 1 month ago
I do not "believe" when it comes to exploring the spiritual sciences, I endeavor to "know".
BscarfaceM 1 month ago
labels like agnostic and atheist have no power over me. they mean nothing. Just like how "homophobic" is a word made up by gays to make you feel bad about not liking them.
BscarfaceM 1 month ago
I'll also say, my definition of a relgious belief is a belief in somthing supernatural. And so my belief that there is not a supernatural god is not a religious belief.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
Welcome back Venomfangx, I am an atheist and I am fairly happy with this video. And I praise you for keeping comments open.
I am happy that you kept this as an argument about the definition of words, since that is all that it really is. Though I will say an agnostic is someone who does not know whether a god exists, and an atheist does not believe a god exists. By those definitions I am an agnostic atheist.
bradkey98765 1 month ago
If there is no difference between religion and non-religion then it doesn't matter whether or not Atheism is a religion. You've answered your own question.
Rejecting a claim is not asserting a claim. Skepticism is not faith.
Also, acknowledging the possibility of being wrong is not the same as admitting an impossibility of knowing truth.
Semantics seem to drive these misunderstandings. You can define and redefine words but that doesn't change reality.
unkledanbot 1 month ago
@eggnogs I think you should be less mean. I mean where are your parents? Hasn't your mother taught you that you shouldn't be mean or rude to other people?
2hakkabakka 1 month ago
Atheism is perhaps the belief that scientific discoveries are the only means through which mankind can learn about reality, but the word "scientist" is already taken, as christians can be scientists too. I don't know if atheism is a religious belief/faith, but it is still a belief/faith. I often find myself making up scientific explanations for things I can't explain, and while these explanations might be completely wrong even in the eyes of science, I have faith in them at that moment.
2hakkabakka 1 month ago
While I'm open to a lot of "leading YouTube atheists" (if that isn't giving them too much credit) taking a stance against christianity simply because they're secretly homosexual, I'm personally not an atheist because I hate God. If there's anything I would hate him for, it'd be that he hasn't given people enough reasons to believe in him. I'm an atheist because to me a world without (at least a christian) god makes more sense, and my best friend is a christian, and I'm a big fan of you as well.
2hakkabakka 1 month ago
I say we start a church of Atheism!
Since so many people have started claiming that our lack of religion is in itself a religion, why argue? lets just go with it. I'd love to see a Church of Atheism. A place we can go to just hang out. who's with me?!!?
Bentlesworth 1 month ago
Atheism may not be a "religion" by definition (same with Theism)
But the "actions" of many atheists state otherwise, cf. Atheist Conventions, burning bibles, Anti-theistic propaganda, destruction of church property etc.
Atheism is very special compared to Asportfanism.
Naturalism which is fully compatible IS a quasi religion in itself and asserts that nature is all there is. Nature did it!
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
Define religion: "The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods." (Google Definitions).
Atheism is not a religion.
IamBread18 1 month ago
@tool2342
You really are brainwashed, ANY atheist that commits to naturalism entials NO GOD.
Naturalism = nature did it, and nature is all there is, therefore no God. This is a TRUTH Claim
So you are another example of a village atheist that is nothing more than a layman in philsophy and you can't think for yourself.
Anyways, I always wondered why atheists have atheist conventions, but we never see non-mechanics have non-mechanic conventions..so what makes atheism so special?
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
8:53 heh, but they never are. the identity principle falls apart when multiple people/definitions are involved. it isn't a logical difference between atheism and theism, it is a functional difference. theists experience all sorts of strange phenomena as part of god, some (claim to) experience pleasure or euphoria in the 'presence of god'. atheists still experience pleasure, but not due to the lack of cause.
lol, i didn't know what god was until it was defined... pretty good argument overall.