[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by Michael.

I disagree. Atheism does have a set of beliefs. Yet as I will show you later on in this post, atheism accounts for the nature, purpose and cause of the universe indirectly. And even if it does not each person subjects their own. However, when you nullify God from the equation it DOES give a belief regarding the cause and purpose of the universe. You say yourself, one says "What ever caused the universe was not God." Therefore, you are saying the cause was not by God but the cause was by something else. You're saying the cause is by something else and therefore deeming a cause to the universe. You say it does not give a purpose? Well it does.

It doesn't give a purpose by that logic. Let me show you why using really simple math. What is the cause of getting 4 (via subtraction just to keep it simple)? 4-0, 3-1, 2-2 and you can then toss in integers. According to you, because these combinations of numbers produce a difference of 4, their purpose must be just that. But that's false, their purpose is to denote a numerical value of something in the physical world or abstract. The point of this is you cannot simply say that because atheism acknowledges that cause of the universe was not god, then the purpose is given through the cause. The purpose is derived possibly through one's atheistic beliefs but also through other beliefs and life experiences. Atheism is simply the disbelief of a god and so you cannot somehow formulate a purpose from that sentence. If you can, then is whatever you deem the purpose to be based on something else? I can flip this around and ask the same for theism, does the belief in a god inherently give a purpose to the universe for someone? No. Even if the religion states one, the person makes their own by adding in elements, such as life experience.

Originally Posted by Michael.

It gives a purpose that is relative to an individual but a purpose none the less, one that is focused on pleasing self. Therefore, the purpose is self-centered. You may say, "Well I do things for the better of society." Great. But in essence you do those things for society because you feel that is the right thing to do and therefore is relative to self and is again self-centered. Now, I'm not saying all atheist are selfish, but that their purpose is self-centered. There is a difference, but I think you see that. If not I'll explain.

You've lost me as to how you've come to the conclusion of two things: 1) The purpose of the universe is pleasing oneself and 2) The purpose you're telling me is somehow absolutely correct because you're not acknowledging any other beliefs or experiences, you're taking this as fact and as far as I can see... there's no way to get that from the one simple statement of a disbelief in god.

Originally Posted by Michael.

Now, as far as having a set of beliefs. It appears you are right, but I will say indirectly it does. If there is no belief in God, then your set of beliefs are merely relative concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe and therefore it indirectly gives you beliefs and qualifies as a religion. Though it may be subjective to each individual within the religion it does not disqualify it as a religion because it is still self-focused.

Nice try but no. See, if I play your game, which I will of saying that somehow the disbelief in a god provides the purpose and such of the universe, then all that stems from ONE belief. The purpose is an INFERENCE from the one belief. This is why your argument it's a religion is still failing because you're taking the one thing to mean several things and then saying that because it means several things, those several things constitute a set of beliefs. Unfortunately, those several things are inferences one makes, not something atheism states.

Originally Posted by Michael.

Let me give you an example within Christianity. Instead of self-focusing, our purpose is on Christ, yet in your view this would still be self-focused.

If atheism is apparently self-focused then I see no reason why theism is any different. You say it is not self-focused so I really don't understand your thinking even here.

Originally Posted by Michael.

Why? Because our subjectivity concerning these questions is a matter of being answered by God, yet these are our relative answers (if you are correct -- though I believe they are objective answers) and therefore still focused on self. However, ignore this for a minute. In Christianity, instead of focusing on self, we focus on Christ (if I am correct about it being objective). Yet in focusing on Christ, He indirectly answers our questions, much like atheism indirectly answers your questions.

Now you're going way into the deep end. You're assuming two very big things: 1) Your answers are indeed from Christ and 2) My answers are indeed from atheism however direct or indirect. You cant simply toss random assumptions around without attempting to remotely back them up and hope someone will follow. So before you begin refuting, back up your assumptions otherwise they're discredited and your strawman argument falls apart.

Originally Posted by Michael.

Regardless, ones purpose is to please Christ within Christianity. One person may be struggling with pornography, another may have struggles with lying. They have a purpose in their Christianity to cut these out because they struggle with them, yet in that purpose it is to please Christ, so indirectly Christ shaped their struggles because they want to please Him, yet their purposes are differing, yet they are still considered a religion.

What's funny about this... is it's an inference about your belief.

Originally Posted by Michael.

In atheism, you believe in no God. Therefore, most things are relative and subjective to an individual. No longer is your goal on pleasing others (though it may be), it ultimately is self-centered, if relative to an individual. Therefore, though one person may have a purpose to be a drunkard and another person to be intelligent, they both have answers regarding the purpose. Each different, yet still qualified as atheist. Why? Because they have a similar belief in no God, which in Christianity the similar belief is a belief in God of the Bible. Therefore, one singular beliefs provides a set of beliefs, though these beliefs may differ.

Ah, thank you for saying it so nicely. One belief (no god/god exists) provides a whole set of beliefs. Notice how the definition of atheism is only about the one belief that you're calling a set because it makes a set.

Originally Posted by Michael.

Atheism does not DIRECTLY answer these questions, yet indirectly and therefore is a set of beliefs relative to an individual. Yet if this is true, then the same is true with Christianity because everything is relative. The only difference is you believe in no God, I believe in the God of the Bible and my response differs from yours to these questions because I believe in a God. I do not follow a set of rules because of a religion, I respond to the idea of God correctly. You respond to the idea of no God correctly. Therefore, indirectly we are only responding to a singular belief and hence forming a multitude set of beliefs based on our responses of one belief that unites us with others.

Thank you yet again, we formulate beliefs through various means all derived from just the one belief. still, you haven't shown atheism is a religion.


I'll respond to the rest when I get back.