There are spiritual people who don’t participate in any sort of organized religion. And then you have people who are super active in organized religion, but don’t believe in or practice that religion’s central teachings. You know, like most (ok, many?) American Christians.
1 Like
We didn’t have a very deep conversation on the topic, but I think he’d tell you he isn’t taking any bits out.
I guess we need to define religion. I was taking a constitutive element to be a belief in theism, and it’s impossible to be an atheist theist, so it’s impossible to be religious and an atheist. But IDK.
I want to talk to this guy. The wikipedia page lead me astray.
I agree that when it comes to Buddhists it’s a semantic problem. In casual conversation, everyone thinks Buddhism is a religion, but I guess you could argue that it’s not really one (at least not in the same way as Christianity and most others).
I think that the problem you’re alluding to is much bigger when you have a religion with a God(s). For example there are also atheist Hindus. That’s harder for me to wrap my head around:
I’m not sure why you are calling these views religions. They seem to call themselves philosophies.
You can’t be an “orthodox” Jew and have it just be ancestry though. He practiced as an orthodox chassidic Jew, but didn’t believe. Why? Probably some mental illness and I mean that literally, not as a joke.
Mostly because they have recognized religions in the name.
Lots of people enjoy ritual and fellowship etc that you get from a church even if they don’t buy into the dogma
1 Like
Buddhism is much more diverse than most people realise. That is why you can call it a religion or a philosophy and it comes with and without ‘gods’ depending on which branch you follow. Personally I think ‘gods’ are not compatible with impermanence but my wife definitely prays to diety’s.
1 Like
What about Brits and the Church of England? They’re all atheists, but say Church of England when asked.
This might have gone over my head. I just assumed that Church of England meant Christian of some sort.
I’m a secular Buddhist.
I practice some of the tenants of Buddhism but ignore everything paranormal or faith based.
Well I think Clovis is a pretty hardcore atheist. I wonder if he agrees with me about anti-theism though: even if God exists, we should fight Him and try to kill Him. Worshiping a being like the Christian God is morally indefensible.
It’s a silly question. It’s like asking if we should fight all the dragons.
It’s an informative hypothetical imo, but sure.
There’s nothing logically impossible about the hypothetical existence of dragons, and if dragons were causing Holocausts and giving kids bone cancer, I’d be anti-dragon too!
On the other hand, an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful God is logically impossible given the state of suffering in the world. So we know that IF a God exists, He is a liar, and a lying God is at least not a logical impossibility. He either doesn’t love us or he is not omnipotent or not omniscient (or some combination of those).
1 Like
The animal situation is proof of God
Blessed are those poor in spirit.