The Religion of Atheism
by Matt Slick
Okay, so the title of this article is a bit provocative. But, I wanted to get your attention. You see, I got the idea for this article after attending the 33rd annual atheist convention in Seattle, Washington, in April of 2007. It was a very interesting experience, and I learned things I did not expect to learn. While sitting in the crowd and listening to speakers and watching the atheists’ reactions, it dawned on me how utterly religious they seemed to be. No, I’m not saying that they believe in a God, and I’m not saying atheism is a religion. But, they sure acted as though it were. Let me explain.
As I sat there watching, taking notes, and listening, I formulated a list that I think is accurate and representative of what I saw at the convention. Please take a look.
1. Creed
1. No God, anti-God, pro-homosexuality, anti-Christianity.
2. Atheism is a belief. I know that many atheists will disagree with this, but the atheists gathered around a common belief of no God or lack of God and the need to increase what they perceive as separation of church and state in America.
2. Crisis
1. Created a problem and offered a solution. The problem was religious oppression in society with atheistic ideals as the solution.
3. Assemblies
1. Gathered in groups with meeting times. Atheists don’t meet nearly as frequently as Christians do in their churches, but they do have state meetings, national meetings, and regular gatherings.
4. Pulpit
1. The lectern from which speeches were made, their ideas were promoted, and their reasons for their belief system were validated.
5. Evangelistic
1. The atheists sought converts to their cause. They frequently spoke about getting the idea of atheism out into society and to move people away from theism.
6. Celebration over converts
1. Rejoiced when converts to their belief system were announced. There was applause and excitement when there were announcements about people who had “come out of the closet” and announced their atheism.
7. Zealous for their cause
1. They wanted their cause and belief system expanded to the extent of changing America to reflect their thinking.
8. Exclusive
1. Only they have the truth. The atheists repeatedly spoke of how atheism was the truth and that theists and deists were ignorant of facts and reason.
9. Us against them mentality
1. There was a profound description of the division between atheism and theism with the atheists being the ones who were defending themselves against the intrusive theists.
10. Concerned about public image
1. This is normal. They were very concerned with how they were perceived and wanted to change their negative reputation.
11. Lack of critical thinking
1. This is common everywhere. Though they thought they were rational, by far most of the arguments and comments weren’t.
12. Misrepresentation of opposing views
1. Again, another common trait among people who gather in groups, have a common ideology, and see others as being less enlightened.
13. Voting block
1. The atheists mentioned voting as a group in order to progress their cause in society.
14. Infighting
1. This is normal for groups. We don’t all see eye to eye. But, they all held to atheism even though they had disagreements about some particulars.
15. Money
1. They didn’t have tithing, but there were plenty of things for sale. And, let’s not forget to mention how they sought donations to help cover the costs of promoting atheism, paying speakers, renting facilities, etc.
Now, I’m sure there are atheists who will debate a few of the issues listed. But, I am just rendering my opinion of what I saw.
I think it is rather ironic that those who are against religion so much are–in actuality–so religious themselves. I couldn’t help smiling and seeing the natural tendency of people to gather around an idea, develop a cause, and then promote it. Unfortunately, the atheists have gathered around non-belief and want that non-belief promoted in society. All I have to say is eternity is a long time to be wrong.
Being religious is believing in a faith-creed system.
Being an atheist is believing in reason and rationality.
Religion and atheism have common grounds of group solidarity.
The Essential difference-Atheists don’t kill, oppress or enslave non-atheists.
Ehtisham Sahib, do you think the Nazis who followed Nietzsche’s philosophy of ‘God is Dead’ were Christians or believers. Lenin, Stalin and their successors were atheists. Mussolini, and Mao were atheist and these communists locked all religious places, killed millions of believers–Jews were killed by the Nazis, Muslims by the Soviets. During the 20th century all wars, Korean, Viet Nam, two World Wars there was no role of religions.
Mirza Ashraf
Nietzsche being German did not mean all Germans and specially Nazis followed that idea. Hitler was officially Roman Catholic as far as I know.
Here I am on Mirza Sahib’s side and don’t agree with A. Ehtisham Sahib that “atheists don’t kill”; both theists and atheists can kill.
What Ehitisham Sahib meant was obviously that atheists don’t wage wars in the name of atheism (as they have no God or religion) as opposed to theists who can’t claim the same because the 300 years of wars in Europe and Crusades and Jihads are a historic fact and the fine example is still being set by present day fundos. I don’t blame Hitler’s religion/faith for war and every one knows that Hitler was out to restore his nation’s pride as a result of WWI ending with degrading treatment to Germans. Jews suffered holocaust not because they followed Moses or David or were Jews….they got that treatment due to the economic hold they had on Germany and wherever they went. There have been wars without any role of religion too and the real fact is all wars have been fought for resources and wherever it was possible religion was exploited or used as a tool to rally forces.
Mirza Sahib also please stop blaming atheism for wars – its baseless and when you repeatedly say this you only display your lack of understanding why wars are fought. Let me ask you in another way, what were the causes of WWI, WWII and Vietnam, Korea wars? How do you blame these wars on atheism?
Babar
Ehtisham Sahib, In Qur’an there is no such injunction to kill an atheist. Muhammad ibn Zakariyya al-Razi (865-925) known in Latin Razes, was a highly active physician, a passionate rationalist who believed in reason and reason alone. He was against prophecy, believing that there is no sense in having humans like prophets guiding the rest of humanity with dogmas. Though he believed in God, but many saw him to be an atheist. No body killed him. If there are any examples of killing atheists in Islam, those might be on account of ignorance or the so called aashiqaan-e-rasul like the murderer of Salman Taseer. MIRZA ASHRAF
I would dismiss this article as a plethora of irrelevant observations. In a gathering of atheists, the only relevant or essential fact is that EACH individual in that gathering did not believe in the existence of commonly described God, and hence rejected all subsequent ideas that flowed from that fountain. Rest of the observations are that of a collective behavior of a crowd, regardless whether they were believers of one kind or another. The collective conduct of people congregating together for a common cause has no relevance whatsoever to atheism.That is just how crowds behave.
Wequar Sahib, on Islam you speak as everything from belief in God, Prophet and the Qur’an is wrong, and now the most latest and new thought is not acceptable to you for discussion. Islam is irrelevant, atheism is irrelevant, God, Prophets, Scriptures are irrelevant, so please give this Forum a list of what is relevant so that we can keep on discussing only relevant subjects. There are many more articles on atheism as religion, not only by the religious people but a very famous magazine “Philosophy Now” openly discusses the views of theism and atheism. I read and participate in every kind of discussion which helps to enhance knowledge. Are you in this group only to attack Islam and would not discuss the most important issue of atheism–the one you believe is rising in numbers and popularity. Please give it deep thought and do not make TF as a campaign against Islam. MIRZA ASHRAF
I quote what Mirza Sahib wrote above, ” There are many more articles on atheism as religion, not only by the religious people but a very famous magazine “Philosophy Now” openly discusses the views of theism and atheism”. Mirza Sahib when you talk about “many more articles on atheism as religion” you should have referred to only the articles that talk about atheism as religion…not refer to an article that does not talk about atheism as religion; That article only talks about theism and atheism as you mentioned too but nevertheless you tried to mislead by saying “not only… but a famous magazine…”. I thank you for sending that article though in a separate email. That article only tries to prove atheism irrational (because atheists can not prove that God does NOT exist). May be Mirza Sahib equated atheism to the religions by atheism also being irrational as per article.
Bertrand Russel’s famous analogy of tea pot comes to mind – something that can not be disproved doesn’t mean it exists. Article is self congratulatory and not impressive at all and totally irrelevant to the topic of “The religion of Atheism”. The word theism with an “a” as a prefix does not equate the two but negates …both (theism and atheism) are opposites.
As always the effort (in the article) is to prove atheists irrational too to feel better that its not only the theists who are irrational. The argument given for not finding proof of non existence of God is that no one has seen the whole universe first hand…what a silly argument – there are many facts that have been determined indirectly e.g. the composition of distant stars by looking at light spectrum which changes with different elements, no one has been to the stars!!
Babar
Reminds me of the case theists filed for “creation” to be taught in schools if “evolution” was taught; theists like to be at least considered equal and for that they try to find parallel in whatever form they can. I guess when atheists claim the domain of logic and rationality the theists feel inferior.
As Wequar Sahib has pointed out, my conclusion was same (before having read Wequar Sahib’s comments) that the observations reflected more on human nature than on ideas.
I almost expected the author to observe and record that the gathered atheists had two eyes and two hands too just like theists.
For the record, considering myself atheists, I do not approve homosexuality, I only oppose discriminating homosexuals. I am not “anti-God”, there is a difference between No-God and Anti-God (to be anti-God one must acknowledge the existence of God). I am not Anti-Christianity, or Anti-Islam for that matter, I am against all religions/dogmas that include all known religions from Judaism to Buddhism – worshiping a God or multiple Gods or no God but Karma etc.
My passion is to learn the nature and our place in this universe based on facts and rational explanations only and I do feel strongly (like a zealot) that indoctrination of young minds is child abuse…. that is the only beef I have with dogma.
Babar
Merriam-Webster dictionary defines religion as “the belief in a god or in a group of gods: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god.”
Atheism is defined as “disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of god or gods.”
Atheism can be described in myriads of ways but not as a religion.
Comment by Wequar Azeem
Entered by Editor of the Month
Its a matter of comprehension. Common sense is not very common.
The discussion started with Matt Slick’s article “The religion of Atheism”. His own opening sentence clears it up which says ” Okay, so the title of this article is a bit provocative. But, I wanted to get your attention.
“
It was merely a ploy to catch the attention; he never meant to say a weird thing like ‘Atheism’ is a religion in itself.
Like I said before, its a matter of comprehension.
First of all I have to thank Noor Sahib, the editor of the month, and then all other members who have realized the importance of this article to appear on the web of TF for discussion. Many points raised by the commenters need my response. I appreciate–and have always appreciated as well as learned from Wequar Azeem–his quick comment which, I believe it is the first time he has promptly but vaguely made, as if he is confronted with this subject. So please let this Forum know, whether Atheism is a religion or just a personal belief of one who is bold enough to say ‘no’ to a Supreme power embedded in the heart and mind of billions and billions of believers from many faiths-except Buddhism or may be few more, from the past millions of years. If Atheism is not a religion, then what social order or a system and above all a way of life it can propose for the humanity. I believe, just saying no to existing socio-religious orders is not enough. The quest of Matt Slick is same as mine to know and then discuss what type of way of life the united atheists under the banner of Atheism can present so that a majority of mankind comes out of the illusions of the unseen controller and determinant of human beings ways of life in this world with a promise of hereafter also.
Regarding, Dr. Ehtisham Sahib’s comment, I fully agree with him that an atheist is peaceful, but I will add “peaceful as an individual.” I also appreciate Babar Sahib to have corrected my point that the wars during the 20th century were not fought on the basis of atheism, but they were rather non-religious wars or to be more clear, religions had no role in all those wars. Dr. Nasik Sahib’s brief comment is self explanatory and I believe he has in mind the article, Atheism on Trial: Philosophy Now issue # 109, in which Stephen Anderson sternly judges a cause célèbre. Those interested, can read this article on line at http://www.philosophynow.org
MIRZA ASHRAF
Dear Mirza Ashraf Sahib,
Nazis were Christians. They killed followers of another creed, Judaism.
Stalin, Mao and others killed not on religious, but political grounds.
The 20th century wars were based on conflicts on resources.
I did not say that only religious people killed.
E
Dear Mirza Ashraf Sahib,
I will leave it up to you to look up sources and find references.