Why Atheism Is A Religion

I liked your post because I appreciate you explained again, but not because I agree. I still don't see atheism as a religion myself in any way (except maybe those people that see use for an atheist church but yeah that isn't atheism on itself, but a particular minority). As long as people or society don't hang any significant conclusion or malpractice onto this opinion/conviction I think it remains a trivial issue.

It doesn't take away the similarities between Buddha and Jesus.

 

There is debate among both, but even Writer tried to argue that Buddha did exist. I think within the debate in society, more people affirm that The Buddha did exist than Christ.

 

What similarity's? The ones from fairy book tales? It's meaningless, invented, myth.

 

sez you

 

To you it may be meaningless. You can't decide what it means for other people.

 

It's not impossible either existed, there's just no evidence. And if they did, neither was a 'divine being', just ordinary humans with extraordinary and possibly inspirational thoughts.

 

I would agree, but wouldn't say that they didn't realize something within themselves that was Divine. But I think that they also paved a way for humans to potentially realize their own Divinity. So they were both ordinary and Divine, but they weren't special. The specialty was thrown onto them by their followers, which is the unfortunate result of Religion.

But the Gospel of Thomas, for example, deliberately left out of the Bible and dug up in 1947, shows the words of a Jesus that is telling one how to discover their own Enlightenment, basically. He wasn't saying I am the Son of God. He was saying words to help one find their own Divinity within.

 

That's how I perceive it as well. A lot of other people see at least one of them as a divine being.... I don't mind. I do mind if they act dubious on that belief or derive a secondary meaning from it that discriminates other people. But that's not really a central religious matter to me personally, and even if it would be to others I would not stigmatize a whole religion because of it.

 

It gets tiring, you twisting shit around so you can play social goody two-shoes.

The similarity's mohsin listed are only the opinions of those authors he chose and not empirically held beliefs of historians. That is what I was addressing.

Not the someones qualitative value of bible verses or Buddha's philosophy.

 

Virgin births? Give me a fuckin' break

 

No. He was posting accurate shit.

 

It gets tiring getting regarded (or conviently and easily put away) as just being pc or trying to look good as well. It is that we got this warning from meagain....

I am giving my sincere opinion, which aparently comes from such a different angle that you see it your way and in fact are projecting shit on me. And by doing that twisting things just as much yourself.
But really, I said that because I think it is true and relevant.

 

Do you know what metaphor is?

Why can the argument be made that it's ok to say that stars die even though that's supposedly just a metaphor, but it's impossible to see bible passages in the same light? 2,000 years ago, people talked about shit in different ways.

 

Atheism has nothing to give .

Oh ? Really ?

And what of pure reasoning that is undefiled by imagination ? Imagine that .
.
.
.
When an atheist accepts divine identity , the Communion ritual provides a baguette and a whole
bottle of wine for each and everyone . Or solitude is fine , too .

 

Yes, that was the best I could find....when I went searching for what was in my head.....just an illustration or gif in silence of a huge tall thing shaking his finger and throwing words out at this little tiny thing.....

Could not find it at the time....though, so settled for that something, I guess.....not quite on the mark of what i felt.....

 

It sounds great (although imagination has it's purpose as well). Are you saying atheists have mastered this art?

 

Dont be rash sir, I respect you views, I am once again requesting that please read my post once again, Buddah and Jesus, both are the prophets of God, if they have some similarities, then what an issue? It is good for religion harmoney.
The basic teachings of Buddha are very similar to those taught by Jesus most of which are contained in his Sermon on the Mount. (Matth. ch 5) - The essence of Buddha's teachings are:
Gautama Buddha taught that all men are brothers, that charity ought to be extended to all, even to enemies; that men ought to love truth and hate the lie; that good work ought not to be done openly; but rather in secret; that the dangers of riches are to be avoided; that man's highest aim ought to be purity in thought, word and deed, since the higher things are pure, whose nature is akin to that of man. (The Angel-Messiah by Benson)

There are, indeed, also points of resemblance in the history of Buddha and Jesus. It has been declared that history of Jesus, as portrayed in the New Testament, is a copy of the history of Buddha:
The most ancient of the Buddhistic records known to us contain statements about the life and the doctrines of Gautama Buddha which correspond in a resemblance manner, and impossibly by mere chance, with the traditions recorded in the Gospels about the life and teachings of Jesus. (The Angel-Messiah by Benson, p 50).

The view has been advanced that the similarities found in the lives and teachings of Gautama Buddha and Jesus could not happen by chance and that as Buddha is the older than Christianity then the former is the parent of the latter. This, of course, is speculation as there are many teachings and points similar and common to all religions.

 

One can only imagine pure reason , but pure reason is devoid of imagination . That's that story .

Now , I think pure music has been more authentically imagined . To a composer it is a music utterly universal and/or
indifferent to any purpose . Why ever perform it ? Don't have to . It's existence is within divine anarchy , but divine anarchy
needs no such art devoted to it .

To hear it is to direct one's own purpose . The artist didn't do that .

It's not so unusual for an audience to rather forget the concert is going on and either chatter away brilliantly like birds together
in a tree or that one fly away unto some inspired essential act of existence .

 

same thing WRONG.
but to know, that whatever god or gods there might or might not be, nothing human knows a damd thing about them, that is not a "religion". that is simply honesty!

a world that can afford a belief that claims to offer a free pass, to disregard the values of logic, consideration and honesty, is not a world we any longer live in
that world ended, before 1980, as the children of the 50s and 60s knew, and tried to warn their elders, that it would.
it is easy for people imagine, that if a thing lasts longer then their own lifetime, longer then their parent's and grandparents as well,
that it can last forever.
a business as usual, with an infinite apatite, for finite resources, cannot.
(and in case anyone didn't 'get it', THAT is what is WRONG with christianity and islam (and not, most other beliefs and non-beliefs))

 

Not sure if there was some misunderstanding...I'm in complete agreement