religion
rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/
noun
noun: religion
- the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
- synonyms: faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology; More
- sect, cult, religious group, faith community, church, denomination, body, following, persuasion, affiliation
"the right to freedom of religion"
- a particular system of faith and worship.
plural noun: religions
"the world's great religions"
- a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.
"consumerism is the new religion"
If you have faith that God does not exist and you pursue it with great devotion then you have yourself a religion .
@Ionus,
I have already cited atheists who say they have an "atheist church," eh?
@layman,
Actually you didn't give a source at all
http://able2know.org/topic/141106-609#post-5916357
Pew say 1 in 5 americans give no religious affiliation
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2012/10/NonesOnTheRise-full.pdf
You can quibble about self defining as atheists - but as I said in your society I would be loathe to 'out myself' as an atheist in many situations. And it's absolutely no shock that the southern states have the lowest 'no religion' numbers.
For Australia
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing, 2011, Cultural Diversity in Australia
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/2071.0main+features902012-2013
New Zealand
"2013 Census QuickStats about culture and identity".
http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/quickstats-culture-identity/religion.aspx
Let me know if you want European and Canadian sources as well.
@hingehead,
Quote:actually you didn't give a source at all
Yeah, I did:
http://able2know.org/topic/141106-608#post-5916246
I was talking about the U.S. and I made that clear.
Yes, and as Pew notes, in the very survey you cite, this has nothing to do with a belief in god:
Quote:Scholars of religion in the United States have been using the term “nones” since the 1960s...The term refers to people who answer a survey question about their religion by saying they have no religion, no particular religion, no religious preference, or the like....as the report makes clear, most of the “nones” say they believe in God, and most describe themselves as religious, spiritual or both.
Nice try.
@layman,
Sorry you've been spamming this thread for days - I've only just read that one post.
Still waiting for you to offer some hints on being an atheist in a religious society. But given you think the USA is the world I guess I shouldn't hold my breath.
@hingehead,
Quote:some hints on being an atheist in a religious society
Keep your head down, shut up and maybe they wont kill you .
@hingehead,
Quote:Still waiting for you to offer some hints on being an atheist in a religious society.
There was a time around these here parts, not all that long ago, when atheists were tarred, feathered, and ran out of town on a rail. Those times have past.
These days, we generally just haul them out to the swamp and bust a cap in their sorry ass, ya know?
@layman,
I think you're talking about the blacks in the south. That's real history.
@layman,
Quote:These days, we generally just haul them out to the swamp and bust a cap in their sorry ass, ya know?
Given your apparent code of ethics it wouldn't surprise me at all. Ain't havin' a god to believe in grand?
We don't know for sure, but we're getting closer.
http://yournewswire.com/chemists-we-now-know-how-life-began-on-earth/
Meanwhile, religion is moving further away (not that it was ever there to begin with).
@Setanta,
Quote:the following is from Religious Tolerance dot org, just about the best broadly-based descriptive site for religions
I checked out that site to see what it had to say. The third position about agnosticism is still a question about knowing, knowing whether( or not knowing in this case) that god(s) exist as a fact. From what I read it is saying the agnostic beliive that you can't know and that is about knowing not what ones believes about whether he believes that god(s) exit. They are separate items. It does not answer the personal question if some one believes that god(s) exist.
That is what i take from that site.
So I guess the question what is one position when one can' know if god(s) exist or not? Lack of knowledge doesn't exclude to have or not have belief.
@argome321,
What it clearly says, and I have already quoted that site verbatim at some length, so I won't do it again now, is that there are 3 (not 2) categories of theological positions. Two of those 3 (theism and atheism) have definite beliefs.
The third one (agnosticism) has no beliefs. The "reason" it has no beliefs is because they don't think there's enough evidence either way to justify a belief one way or the other.
Take-home point: An agnostic is NOT an atheist.
@layman,
Quote:What it clearly says, and I have already quoted that site verbatim at some length, so I won't do it again now, is that there are 3 (not 2) categories of theological positions. Two of those 3 (theism and atheism) have definite beliefs.
The third one (agnosticism) has no beliefs. The "reason" it has no beliefs is because they don't think there's enough evidence either way to justify a belief one way or the other.
Take-home point: An agnostic is NOT an atheist.
here's why I disagree -and I am saying this as an example.
Belief in and of itself doesn't require knowledge. The belief may be proven wrong or it may be proven right at some later day or perhaps never. You and I both know people will believe all sorts of things for what ever reason(s) good or bad and sometimes they don't have any evidence for believing what they believe. We also know people will believe stuff when the evidence is counter to their beliefs,
Basically that was all I was saying.
That is why I try to separate the two.
@argome321,
Quote:here's why I disagree -and I am saying this as an example.
Well, you can disagree all you want WITH what that site says, but I don't think there can be any disagreement about WHAT that site says.
Quote:Belief in and of itself doesn't require knowledge.
No, but what belief does require is BELIEF. If there is no belief, then one is NOT an atheist, nor is he a theist. He is an agnostic. According to that site and according to English dictionaries, anyway.
@layman,
Quote:No, but what belief does require is BELIEF. If there is no belief, then one is NOT an atheist, nor is he a theist. He is an agnostic.
Well, I can only say that we disagree on this point.
@argome321,
Quote:Well, I can only say that we disagree on this point
As I said, you can disagree all you want. But it's not just with me that you disagree. It's also with English dictionaries and the site you referred to.
http://able2know.org/topic/141106-608#post-5916115
@layman,
It doesn't matter whether I agree or disagree with what ever you cite, many definitions are ambiguous at best concerning this topic. Second, I have had conversation with others who know exactly what I am talking about.
The printed language is not law.
So personally I don't care what any particular book in print says. Printed books can be wrong also. And language evolves constantly. Language is fluid.
@argome321,
Words aside, do you think there is any significant difference between the definition you insist on adopting and the definition given by the dictionary?
As a more concrete example of what I'm asking, do you think there is any significant difference between a cat and a dog?
If you so, would me deciding to call cats "dogs" change them into dogs?
@layman,
Quote:Words aside, do you think there is any significant difference between the definition you insist on adopting and the definition given by the dictionary?
what I insist on is using words as best I can to define and describe my opinions and beliefs the best way I can. For the most part words sometimes are inefficient when trying to explain some ideas, that is why perhaps it fails sometime. So sometime inadequate words are used, So I try to concentrate on what is being said; the message as oppose to the some limited definition.
I don't know if that makes sense to you or not. That is just me
@argome321,
Quote:So I try to concentrate on what is being said; the message as oppose to the some limited definition. I don't know if that makes sense to you or not. That is just me
No, that's not "just" you. I agree that the message is what's important.
Did you see the part I added to my last post about cats and dogs?
Because you still haven't answered my question. You just said something else. But there's something else important here, when choosing words, I think.
