adaku123:


@TUDOR

Since when did atheism stop being a religion, that is the most common mistake people make when they here the word ATHEIST

Atheists do not believe in the presence of gods or God, It is still a belief at the end of the day,  Just as christianity is the belief in Jesus christ as the son of GOD that came and died and cleansed our sins,  there are even christian atheists like that guy thomas altizer

Religion mainly refers to a belief system which results in different people having certain convictions and probably specific behaviours,
This makes Atheism a religion which believes in irreligion,  If you catch the meaning,   


what type of atheist are you?  what exactly do you or do you not believe in? there are different types of atheism? even certan types of buddhists are atheists,

I think you should understand a concept before telling ppl they need a psych evaluation,   Dont You Think?

First of all if you're too lazy to read then you have absolutely no business here. If you'd at least taken your time to read the replies instead being so consumed with passion prematurely you would have seen that noetic had first suggested that atheists need monthly psychiatric check ups hence my reply to him.

That aside, it's a wonder the way you religionists twist and turn the definition of the word "religion" in order to drag atheism into your cesspit of ignorance.
Below is your flawed definition.

Religion mainly refers to a belief system which results in different people having certain convictions and probably specific behaviours,

This is to put it mildly, absolute hogwash!
Religion mainly refers to belief in and worship of god or gods. I honestly wonder how a sane human being would classify atheism as that.

Using your crappy definition and assertion that all beliefs are religion, a belief in santa clause would serve as religion , belief in wearing boxers rather than tights is religion too, howbout belief in walking barefoot? - what a laugh!


Bottom line: Religion is a belief but not all beliefs are religion.
Try and write that on your palm and read it everyday, it'll help improve your understanding.

blah blah blah are u not tired of ur very old repetitibe stories?

Blah bla blah you too

@ topic

I think it's gonna be a right step in the right direction. . . . especially with the incessant proliferation of churches, especially!

The truth is; by all standards, the church of God can not be poor. Remember the popular saying “Givers never lack” this is a reality, a universal law it is, irrespective of who you are or what you are. The more we honestly give the more we receive and the more the gospel is preached (Church growth). I am very sure the givers do not complain but none-givers do because they could not understand how the givers get more to give (it’s a law)

Luke 6:38. Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

John 12:24. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

Note that no body is compelled to give or go to church, it’s a personal decision. So the government can not decide the extent of what and how one can give thereby can not regulate the church finance because the givers are the factors of church growth.

I will rather advise all the church leaders to remember the early church (none of them lack) and that the money is strictly meant for the propagation of the gospel and to bless humanity not for a selfish purpose. Everyone shall be judged according to their works

adaku123:

@ Tudor

Lol, Seriously, Is that the best you could come up with at your age, My bestfriend is an atheist [/b]and makes sound reasonable judgements,

You best friend is an atheist, so what?
What are we supposed do. . . .crown you Miss Congeniality?

Don't flatter yourself, wherever you see a smart and intelligent fellow you would always see a nagging retard tagging along.
From your posts and the level of thinking you present, it aint that hard to know who's who in that friendship.

But what you can come up with is that a belief in WEARING BOXERS RATHER THAN TIGHTS IS ALSO A BELIEVE RELIGION,

Is the argument not valid?
You haven't said anything to dismiss this as a religion.
Pls do and stop lazily avoiding the question.

What do you want me to do?? Quote dictionaries, I will, Webstar says religion is ''a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith''  And Atheist is ''one who believes that there is no deity''

[b]The keyword being belief, If you are going to argue then do it logical, Being an atheist you guys are suppose to be very logical and you always come with proofs of this and that,

An atheist doesn't simply lack positive belief in God. The atheist has positive belief in the non-existence of God."

Again you identify the keyword in defining religion as "belief".

I'll ask you identify which of the following beliefs is religion and tell me why they qualify or not.
1. A belief in santa clause.
2. A belief in wearing shoes instead of slippers.
3. A belief that jesus was a black man.
4. A belief that JFK's assasin was not acting alone.
5. A belief that aliens exist.
6. A belief that Aliens do not exist.
7. A belief that Tupac shakur is Alive.
8. A belief that Elvis presly is really dead and not alive.
9. A belief that numbers exist.
10. A belief that numbers do not exist.
11. A belief in free market economy [capitalism]
12. A belief in government controlled economy (communism)

Atheists are hypocrites for attacking the faithful when atheism itself is a result of faith. Even a court declared it a religion http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874

Even a court found O.J Simpson not guilty of murder!
A court upheld Yar'Adua's election as free and fair! - it's amazing what lawyers can do these days, isn't it?

Religion is a philosophy of life. So is atheism. Examples are Secular Humanism and even forms of buddhism.

So is idealism, realism, communism, capitalism e.t.c. Are they religions too?

Religions has its leaders, the preachers of its tenets. So does atheism (Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx).

What a laugh!
Before these men existed, were there no atheists?
Every belief has it's vocal proponents, it not?

Religion has its faithful believers, who guard the orthodoxy of the faith. So does atheism.

So do communists and capitalists are they religions too?
Go to CUBA and preach capitalism and see if you come out alive. That's well they guard their communist beliefs.

Religions believe in Eschatology, And most atheists believe in this even though its not about goin to heaven or hell, 

You now resort to lies in your desperate attempt to classify atheism a religion.
Could you clearly point out the Esachtological beliefs of the "most atheists" you're talking about?

And religion is a matter of faith, not certainty. Your own faithful say that,  Cosidering science changes everyday but the WORD OF GOD Christianity remains the same,

what is the meaning of this blabber above?
What word of god?
Where is the evidence to show that those deluded writings are from god?
Mohammed wrote his own book and calls it the word of god too, On what basis do you reject the quaran but accept the bible as the word of god.

Dont argue like a retard, U are shaming the nigerian population,  If you u see a flaw in my argument , correct ME, 

I'm merely applying your presented logic to all other spheres of life.
If it sounds like the arguments of a retard then look no further than YOURSELF, coz afterall the argument that "the keyword in defining religion is belief" came from YOU and YOU ALONE.

Agressiveness is not the method to argue, It shows WEAKNESS , Do you think i didnt read all the posts before commenting? D guy said ATHIESM should also be regulated since its a religion, And yes it is a religion!!!

I guess you also saw the part where he said atheists need mental evaluation or did jesus cover it?

if you are going to talk about something, Back it UP, OK, Dont ARgue like a DULL CHILD ,

Okay. Now be smart and answer the above questions.

adaku123:


@ Tudor

Lol, Seriously, Is that the best you could come up with at your age, My bestfriend is an atheist and makes sound reasonable judgements, But what you can come up with is that a belief in WEARING BOXERS RATHER THAN TIGHTS IS ALSO A BELIEVE,

What do you want me to do?? Quote dictionaries, I will, Webstar says religion is ''a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith'' And Atheist is ''one who believes that there is no deity''

The keyword being belief, If you are going to argue then do it logical, Being an atheist you guys are suppose to be very logical and you always come with proofs of this and that,

An atheist doesn't simply lack positive belief in God. The atheist has positive belief in the non-existence of God."

Atheists are hypocrites for attacking the faithful when atheism itself is a result of faith. Even a court declared it a religion http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874

Religion is a philosophy of life. So is atheism. Examples are Secular Humanism and even forms of buddhism. Religions has its leaders, the preachers of its tenets. So does atheism (Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx).

Religion has its faithful believers, who guard the orthodoxy of the faith. So does atheism. Religions believe in Eschatology, And most atheists believe in this even though its not about goin to heaven or hell, 

And religion is a matter of faith, not certainty. Your own faithful say that,  Cosidering science changes everyday but the WORD OF GOD Christianity remains the same,

Dont argue like a retard, U are shaming the nigerian population,  If you u see a flaw in my argument , correct ME, 

Agressiveness is not the method to argue, It shows WEAKNESS , Do you think i didnt read all the posts before commenting? D guy said ATHIESM should also be regulated since its a religion, And yes it is a religion!!!

if you are going to talk about something, Back it UP, OK, Dont ARgue like a DULL CHILD ,

  ROTFLOL . . . see koboko!   

@ Tudor,

@ Adaku123.

Permit me to attempt to act as a Judge in your very interesting debate. (I am a lawyer by the way!).

First off: Both of you are obviously quite intellectual and you both try to bring an academic/ research slant to what you say. For this reason, i would ask that you continue the discussion, but without the insults - because quite frankly, its easy to see that neither of you is daft. So please easy up on words like "retard", "dumb", etc.

There is actually a perfect mid-point in your arguments that shows you both are somewhat right.

The mid point is this:

In colloquial terms, the word religion may indeed be applied to anything that one is so obessed with, that virtually amounts to worship, or giving one's life to that thing or that idea. I certainly know my own personal love for sexy women amounts to a religion for me: i literally worship feminine sexuality. I also worship other things that may be said to be a religion for me; football, for example. So Adaku's statements are not entirely without merit.

However we are all aware that the particular sense in which the word religion is being used on this topic is as regards spirituality and formalized worship systems, and i believe the topic opener made this clear. For this reason i am compelled to agree with Tudor that in this context the word religion only refers to its theological meaning: namely - mankind's search for God, gods, deities & entities supernatural, etc, and the worship of such.

See the link from Wikipedia here attached.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

In this respect, to the extent that atheism does not seek such, it can never be considered a religion. At best it is a mere idea, a proposition, and it is ridiculous to talk about regulating a proposition or an idea. By the way, do note that an atheist (who believes that God does not exist) is quite different from an agnostic, who believes that the idea of God is so abstract, it can never be understood, and should not be attempted.

Have i been a good judge? Rate me guys.

@Deep Sight,

Don't waste your valued time. Just keep reading. LOL

did tudor actually read adakwu's last post before responding?

JeSoul:

  ROTFLOL . . . see koboko!   

Am I suprised. . . Absolutely NOT!

noetic2:

did tudor actually read adakwu's last post before responding? 

I suspect she's your wife or sister. . .

Deep Sight:

@ Tudor,

@ Adaku123.

Permit me to attempt to act as a Judge in your very interesting debate. (I am a lawyer by the way!).

First off: Both of you are obviously quite intellectual and you both try to bring an academic/ research slant to what you say. For this reason, i would ask that you continue the discussion, but without the insults - because quite frankly, its easy to see that neither of you is daft. So please easy up on words like "retard", "dumb", etc.

There is actually a perfect mid-point in your arguments that shows you both are somewhat right.

The mid point is this:

In colloquial terms, the word religion may indeed be applied to anything that one is so obessed with, that virtually amounts to worship, or giving one's life to that thing or that idea. I certainly know my own personal love for sexy women amounts to a religion for me: i literally worship feminine sexuality. I also worship other things that may be said to be a religion for me; football, for example. So Adaku's statements are not entirely without merit.

However we are all aware that the particular sense in which the word religion is being used on this topic is as regards spirituality and formalized worship systems, and i believe the topic opener made this clear. For this reason i am compelled to agree with Tudor that in this context the word religion only refers to its theological meaning: namely - mankind's search for God, gods, deities & entities supernatural, etc, and the worship of such.

See the link from Wikipedia here attached.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

In this respect, to the extent that atheism does not seek such, it can never be considered a religion. At best it is a mere idea, a proposition, and it is ridiculous to talk about regulating a proposition or an idea. By the way, do note that an atheist (who believes that God does not exist) is quite different from an agnostic, who believes that the idea of God is so abstract, it can never be understood, and should not be attempted.

Have i been a good judge? Rate me guys.

  Lol . . . a lawyer in the house 
I don't like your final verdict, but I would say your cross-examination is very sound, fair and compelling. I think the jury will be spilt and hung at an impasse

Deep Sight:

@ Tudor,

@ Adaku123.

Permit me to attempt to act as a Judge in your very interesting debate. (I am a lawyer by the way!).

First off: Both of you are obviously quite intellectual and you both try to bring an academic/ research slant to what you say. For this reason, i would ask that you continue the discussion, but without the insults - because quite frankly, its easy to see that neither of you is daft. So please easy up on words like "retard", "dumb", etc.

There is actually a perfect mid-point in your arguments that shows you both are somewhat right.

The mid point is this:

In colloquial terms, the word religion may indeed be applied to anything that one is so obessed with, that virtually amounts to worship, or giving one's life to that thing or that idea. I certainly know my own personal love for sexy women amounts to a religion for me: i literally worship feminine sexuality. I also worship other things that may be said to be a religion for me; football, for example. So Adaku's statements are not entirely without merit.

However we are all aware that the particular sense in which the word religion is being used on this topic is as regards spirituality and formalized worship systems, and i believe the topic opener made this clear. For this reason i am compelled to agree with Tudor that in this context the word religion only refers to its theological meaning: namely - mankind's search for God, gods, deities & entities supernatural, etc, and the worship of such.

See the link from Wikipedia here attached.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

In this respect, to the extent that atheism does not seek such, it can never be considered a religion. At best it is a mere idea, a proposition, and it is ridiculous to talk about regulating a proposition or an idea. By the way, do note that an atheist (who believes that God does not exist) is quite different from an agnostic, who believes that the idea of God is so abstract, it can never be understood, and should not be attempted.

Have i been a good judge? Rate me guys.

Now here is an objective christian!
I rate you sweet!

Pls inform the hypocrites like Jesoul and noetic the type of bible you read as well as the church you attend so they can learn how to be good christians by example.

Can we all return to the topic which is about whether religious bodies should be regulated? By regulation my thinking initially was regarding the manipulation of ignorant people by some pastors to make financial gains. Ironically they live in affluence and abundance while many of their followers wallow in poverty

My answer is YES!!!!

Nigeria seems to be where "anything goes"
Pastors wake up everyday to tell people what they like, change the scripture to fit their purpose.

If nothing can be done, at least there should be a structure/hierarchy in the church, by that I mean who succeeds who? when and to ensure that is followed, because many of them are now handing out the church assets and positions to their sons and wife.

They are highly irresponsible, fighting over land here and there,congesting the highways and not making plans to help the country. Teaching pple to just have hope(not faith) by sowing their little money that things will change and thus making Nigerians acquire the mentality of just tying their hands and sitting down , to say "its well" .

This must stop. what about building branches all over the world? are there banks or departmental stores?
Now its Universities with sub standard facilities, no borrowed lecturers and very high fees, what is that? BUSINESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How many of the church pastors is criticizing this bad and corrupt Govt? none, because they are gaining from the situation. MORE POVERTY AND UNEMPLOYMENT = MORE PPLE GOING TO CHURCH FOR SHELTER.
but you know what happens? The church takes the little that the pple struggle to get, what a pity!!!!

Yes, and i have said no conscientous person should object to a UK-style Charity Commission, the functions of which will simply be to monitor expenses of charities (including religious bodies such as churches) to avoid fraud.

@ Tudor;

Not a christian, please. Free thinker. I do believe in God of course, and worship HIM privately.

Deep Sight:

Yes, and i have said no conscientous person should object to a UK-style Charity Commission, the functions of which will simply be to monitor expenses of charities (including religious bodies such as churches) to avoid fraud.

 Not long ago congress looked into the financials of several mega-churches here in the US - but it was optional (as it should be) for the churches to agree to it or not. As you said it will be suspect for any church to refuse it as some did. And it up to the parishioner how to proceed from there.

Now this is my problem. Nobody, I repeat nobody forces anyone to go to church. The church does not take the money from people, they are not forced - people stupidly willingly give them their money. If you're being fleeced and see no returns on your 'investments' in tithes and offerings - why still continue to give them your hard-earned money? I don't buy it that this is due to ignorance - I think it is greed too. You want to reap wealth where you haven't sown it, want to land a windfall when you haven't gone out and toiled and labored for it and a wolf in pastor's clothing ends up taking you for a ride.

 If we truly want to stop the robbery of the population by these charlatans - then the government should concern itself with its basic duties such as educating the people, providing basic infrastructure and security and we will see less and less of this nonsense.

Tudór:

I suspect she's your wife or sister. . .

so objective? . . . . so for stating facts shez now my sister or wife. . blah blah blah. . when will it all end?

chei. . .see as she finish tudor If na me I no go gree oooo

where is tudor?

adaku123:

@Noetic
Thanks for agreeing with me!!! We might be related, you never know, lol

Noetic will agree with anything no matter how tactless as long as it lies for jesus.

@ Deep Sight
Its alright for you to be a judge, But being a judge means you view things objectively, And you ve to research the points arguing for or against the case.You simply cant quote WIKIPEDIA, It is just not acceptable,  it is not a reliable source of information and cant form the basis of ur decision

He has looked objectively at the arguments and made his decision. Tell me, is it by force to agree with you?
If you have a problem with the wikipedia article go edit it and see how fast it'll be erased- wikipedia isn't for people with stupid ideas.

@ Tudor
Its difficult for you to address a situation logically, I AM SHOCKED

I'm SHOCKED TOO!
simple task i gave you to identify religions in a 12 item long list and you're ranting.
Is it so hard to say yes this is religion and no this isn't while stating your reasons?
Haba!

1] When i argue about the different forms of atheisms and the well-respected  scholars involved in the field!!!You list types of society, economic ideas and political movements such as communism , capitalism, Are u kidding me

Madam, are they not all beliefs?
A belief in free market economy is it not capitalism?
You who wants to argue logically why not logically dismiss them as non-beliefs instead of raving like a rabid dog.

2]i name the philosophers, cultural commentators and world class professors who have studied the subject.And you ask me if nobody existed before this men,I personally picked ppl from 1500's to 21st century

does it state in your bible that atheism began in the 1500's?

The age old knowledge and scientifically verified fact that when something dies it decomposes is now an Eschatological belief?
I no fit shout oo o!

4]On what basis do i accept the bible and reject the Koran Are you now a muslim Do you want to argue about muslims all of a sudden, how about you stiick to what you dont know

You said the WORD OF GOD stands forever.
I was merely asking you to back up your statements with proof.
Again why is that so hard for you? ,

You can call me lazy but i simply just cant be involved in responding to things like IF SOMEONE SHOULD WERE BOXERS OR SHORTS!!! My life involves better things, AM really sorry i just cant,

WHY WHY WHY WHY
Could it be that perhaps you see the folly in your line of argument?

5]I talk about a court ruling atheism as religion, U talk of Oj simpson, In a court of law the ruling is based on the evidence and since a court found oj simpson not guilty then it stands, Do you have prove that he is not

A civil court in 2003 or thereabout found him culpable for the murders. . . .since two courts have said different things which are we to believe, guilty or not guilty?

Or you just think he is not,U also argue about Yaradua's election which was classed as fair and correct, Yes it has been classified but thats the nigerian govt and obviously that wouldnt hold in the world court, but is that the argument here?

Ofcourse it's the argument. You claimed a "court" ruled atheism as a religion. I only gave you other "reliable" court rulings. . .

An oh, why wouldn't yar'adua's election stand in a world court. Any evidence to show the court you mentioned is more credible than the election tribunal in Abuja?

6] I can see i have offended ur ego by saying you cant make reasonable arguments, But that still holds YOU JUST CANT, Insulting me doesnt mean you can!!!!

Ouch!
Don't beat up yourself, my ego is FINE.
you've just made me laugh with your evasive tactics

I AM NOT even SURE Y you cant !!! I HAVENT BEEN IN DIS TYPE OF SITUATION AND I REALLY DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO!!!

Cry! cry! cry!
Why not go cry to your mummy!

ABANDONing THIS SHIP because OF IGNORANCE OF THE OTHER PARTY SEEMS LIKE THE BeST option,  normally ppl prove thier point and you accept it but in this case, U just cant!!!

Err before you abandon ship like a liverless rat kindly answer the questions below.

adaku123:

@ Tudor
Webstar says religion is ''a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith''  And Atheist is ''one who believes that there is no deity''
The keyword being belief. .

Again you identify the keyword in defining religion as "belief".

I'll ask you identify which of the following beliefs is religion and tell me why they qualify or not.
1. A belief in santa clause.
2. A belief in wearing shoes instead of slippers.
3. A belief that jesus was a black man.
4. A belief that JFK's assasin was not acting alone.
5. A belief that aliens exist.
6. A belief that Aliens do not exist.
7. A belief that Tupac shakur is Alive.
8. A belief that Elvis presly is really dead and not alive.
9. A belief that numbers exist.
10. A belief that numbers do not exist.
11. A belief in free market economy [capitalism]
12. A belief that germs do not exist.

Why is this so painful for you?

Answer the simple questions above and don't come here ranting like a menopausal old timer!
The exercise is pretty straight forward, using your definition of "religion" identify which of the beliefs aforementioned is religion and which is not stating your reasons.

If this question is so painful for you that you wanna cry, CRY!

If the thing dey choke and scratch your body too much then thats your business!!

Pull out your hair, naked yourself, jump, bounce your tits and RANT,. . . . i DON'T CARE!!!
My own be say you MUST answer these questions!!

adaku123:

@ Tudor
Webstar says religion is ''a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith''  And Atheist is ''one who believes that there is no deity''
The keyword being belief. .

Again you identify the keyword in defining religion as "belief".

I'll ask you identify which of the following beliefs is religion and tell me why they qualify or not.
1. A belief in santa clause.
2. A belief in wearing shoes instead of slippers.
3. A belief that jesus was a black man.
4. A belief that JFK's assasin was not acting alone.
5. A belief that aliens exist.
6. A belief that Aliens do not exist.
7. A belief that Tupac shakur is Alive.
8. A belief that Elvis presly is really dead and not alive.
9. A belief that numbers exist.
10. A belief that numbers do not exist.
11. A belief in free market economy
12. A belief that germs exist.
13. A belief that germs do not exist.

If you like keep ranting, i'll keep reposting this questions until you answer them!

@ Adaku123

@ Tudor

@ Noetic -

It appears the previous effort of the Judge (my humble self) to pour oil on troubled waters was not very successful.

First off: i really find this debate very engaging, and i would hate for either party to abandon the thread on account of rude language coming from another party. We really can engage each other without insults. In this regard i feel that both Adaku & Tudor have failed to hold on to my earlier charge to keep the debate clean. But Tudor's insults are somewhat worse, and in that regard, Adaku my lady, do accept my apologies on his behalf. You see, he is only a very determined debater who perforce needs to get his point across.

You really are wonderful people,  lets not take the spice out of this ok?

In fact i was thinking just now wouldn't it be nice to have an evening out with you all and we actually meet each other and reason face to face over steaming bowls of isi-ewu, pepper soup and cold beer!

Now i will make a second attempt to court the issues.

I see Adaku is not too pleased with the reference to Wikipedia. In that regard let me say that although i accept that Wikipedia is not necessaily the Oracle of Ijebu Ode, it certainly is a very factual and objective site quite useful for research. Nevertheless, we really do not need Wikipedia to resolve this.

The point i tried to make in my last post was simply that your respective understandings of the word "religion" - are both right BUT the particular context of this thread with reference to religion obviously deals with spiritual formalized religion.

That is the why the question of "regulating religion" was put up in the fisrt place. Of course you can only regulate something,  a person or a body of persons, that has taken form and actively propagates itself within corporate society. (In law, a "person" means either an individual, a company, or other registered organization). Churches, Mosques, etc are registered bodies as incorporated trustees, and accordingly they are able to open bank accounts, own land, enter into contracts, etc.

If you had a body called, for example "Association of Atheists of Uganda," and such body was duly registered, such a body would have the same rights, and then it would make sense to perhaps talk about regulating their activities in society.

However if there are no such bodies, then Atheism, like any other belief (including really religious beliefs which are unregistered, such as Voodoo, Juju, etc) is a living room discussion and not a registered forum that can be regulated.

Even if my reasoning above is wrong - the question still begs - this thread is about regulating religious bodies on account of misappropriation of MONEY. To the extent that Atheism is not a body that appropriates ANY money from ANY body or group, then of course, there is nothing to regulate.

But that deals with the puritanical aspects as per the intentions of the topic opener (who by the way must be really unhappy that we have disgressed so much).

To the more substantive level of your debate, i must once again say this: Adaku - you must surely admit that not every belief can be categorized as a religion. Please dont be stubborn on that. It is patently obvious. Tudor has tried to use extreme examples to drive home the point - such as when he asks if a belief in santa claus is a religion. But to use an even softer example, you will surely agree that agnosticism is not a religion - it is simply a view point that states that God cannot be understood or approached. Atheism is surely a viewpoint as well.

If i believe that Yaradua is incompetent - would you call that a religion, simply because it is a belief?

No, it is simply a viewpoint.

I think the critical element in religion is that worship of some sort is involved in it.

To the extent that Atheists do not believe in God, or any gods at all (much less worship them), surely that's not a religion.

Let's keep up the Good Spirited Talk.

@ Tudor - please be more polite to the lady in the house.

Signed -

On behalf of the the Nigerian Judiciary!

@the honorable Lawyer Deepsight,

     very well spoken sir, very well spoken and I think you may be right. Lets see Adaku's (whom I am liking very much for her "honest humor"  )response to your well laid out argument.

@Deep sight.
Thanks for your efforts at peace making but anyone who's willing to mudsling shouldn't be itchy about getting the barrel end of the gun.
Personally i don't care if you insult me or not, it makes no difference and i'm more than ready to reciprocate whether peace or hostility.

I really do wonder why the so-called christians like complaining. Each time the atheist speaks they say you're rude, aggressive or obssessed, but when christians use vituperations they label it "aggressive evangelism" or "honest humour" - i laugh! ; D

Anyway the adaku character would soon barge in ranting and raving like a rabid dog describing your viewpoint as illogical even going as far as stating a "court" in Somalia ruled atheism a religion- what a joker!
When she does (and hell yes she will) be kind enough to point her to the simple assignment i gave her- i sincerely wonder why she's always crying and ranting each time i ask those questions. . . .any ideas?

Adaku, please dont disappear from the thread on account of Tudor. We are missing you.

Your comments will be appreciated.

@Tudor, yes she did use strong words, but its going a bit too far to say things like "rabid dog" to a lady, dont you think?

@Adaku, again, i apologise on his behalf.

@ Deep Sight
The debate of if atheism is a religion is currently ONGOING in the world, 
I am personally believe in GOD but do not subscribe to any particular religion , However my MUM is a christian and my Dad is a muslim,  Best of both worlds, LOl ,  ALSO I NEVER EVER RUN FROM AN ARGUMENT, LOL, ITS THE WOMAN IN ME>>>LOL

Dis argument could have ended ages ago,  However what made it interesting is the INABILITY of TUDOR to make strong points, he instead picked on a single word BELIEF and decided to use that as the beginning and the end of his argument,  What am trying to proof to dis guy is that you can’t just make a POINT & NOT BACK IT UP,   

Personally if i argued on the opposite side i would have said
1] Atheists do not believe in a god or gods. This is obviously a  tautology, of course, since the term "atheism" itself carries that literal meaning,  I would have argued that the disbelief in GOD is not sufficient because other belief systems such as Shinto, Taiosm, Scientology and even Buddhism do not belief in God but are classified as religion

2] He should have argued that there is no common belief,  there are dreadful secular humanists, there are logical empiricists, even existentialists, skeptics, nihilists – they are very plenty types . They dont all believe in evolution or science,  All that binds atheists together is their absolute disbelief,

3] I would have gone for the argument that saying atheism is not a religion is wrong >>> it Is like saying that black which is defined by physicists as the absence of color!!! is not a color,  It is common practice to refer to black as a colour although there are technical definitions to the opposite, So if black is color , then atheism is a religion,  And should be referred to as the CHURCH OF LIBERALISM

4] He should have argued that there is no SCRIPTURE like islam to Koran, Christianity to the bible, Hinduism to Upanishads  etc , Atheism has no scripture, I will have argued that they can use the father of evolution Darwin,,, His book ORIGIN of species, but i know that doesn’t count because SCIENCE is constantly changing, And all through my years in med school , i kept coming across scientists who think Darwin was exceptional or a total idiot, some christians dont beleve in the old testament

5] When i named prominent atheists such as Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx, A real atheists would know that all this guys didn’t even like each other, They hardly ever agreed but they were all atheists, There is no priesthood or no ritualistic leaders unlike other religions, there is no sacred text, there are not even people attending worship

6] There is no sustained tradition or history ,  which most religions have,  There is no founding father or prophet like Jesus, Mohammed, Moses etc ,  I would have argued that Galileo was a founding father and is accorded with  reverence even though it is not on the same level as MOHAMMhed, or even Ron Hubbard, 

7] there are no holidays apart from maybe festivus,  There is no dress code, Although i would have argued that certain forms of Christianity don’t have a dress code, and all certain types of Buddhists only require comfortable shoes, hahahaha

8] u should have argued that Atheism has no MYTHs, Then i would have argued that the big bang theory is a myth, However not all atheist blive in science , I would have said the the same goes for most forms of Christianity, My Aunt goes to deeper life church nig, And they are not allowed to wear earings or even watch TV, lol,  ITS D DEVIL, hahahahaha

The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in its article on Religion listed characteristics of religion namely:
1. Belief in supernatural beings (gods).
2. A distinction between sacred and profane objects.
3. Ritual acts focused on sacred objects.
4. A moral code believed to be sanctioned by the gods.
5. Characteristically religious feelings (awe, sense of mystery, sense of guilt, adoration), which tend to be aroused in the presence of sacred objects and during the practice of ritual, and which are connected in idea with the gods.
6. Prayer and other forms of communication with gods.
7. A world view or a general picture of the world as a whole and the place of the individual therein. This picture contains some specification of an over-all purpose or point of the world and an indication of how the individual fits into it.
8. A more or less total organization of one's life based on the world view.
9. A social group bound together by the above.

It is quite difficult to claim ATHIESM is a religion from the above….However it is also difficult to claim THEISM is a religion… the mere belief in God doesn’t automatically qualify as a religion,  and many ppl who belief in God do not practice the above…
In order to have a religion, you need quite a bit more than either simple belief or disbelief. This fact is clearly reflected in the real world, because we find theism which exists outside of religion and religion which exists without theism. RELIGION IS SUCH A NARROW WORD ISNT IT ?


13] Atheists have one common disbelief -----there is no GOD!!!!  Theist have one belief--- there is GOD
Atheists and theists both break down into many groups with specific choices and goals…However the theists are then labeled religion with christians, muslims, jews…Why cant the atheists be labeled into religion after there are existentialists, secular humanists etc because when you drill down even into muslims you find quite a lot of diversity…I agree atheism is not a religion…it should even be many religions LMAOF>>> TUDOR IS SQUEEZING HIS FACE AT THIS POINT

14] Belief is belief. I believe that my next breath will contain enough oxygen to sustain me. We can both argue whether beliefs are verifiable and then argue again over how verifiable and under what circumstances.

15]But no one can argue that these arent in fact beliefs. You can't group beliefs as spiritual, scientific, or whatever. I belief or dont believe, simply implies a "faith", >>>In some cases it might be "hope" that something is true>>>>> beliefs are obviously different,  but that not wat you are arguing

16] The only thing that separates beliefs is the proofs or evidence that can be used to support them. Religious beliefs are seperasted cos most ppl feel it is unlikely that they will be proved in a visual, verifiable, reproducible way. However, IF they were proved in the manner by God showing up, they would cease to be different than the belief

Thus the belief in and of itself is not different. The evidence is. Atheism can't be proved anymore than religion can. Can
you prove to me that God doesn't exist? In a verifiable reproducible manner? No more than I could prove to you that God does exist.

17] Sure it seems likely that based on what you know that a God may not exist. But you can't prove it. You believe it based on the best available evidence to you AND your own personal bias. I can look at the same evidence, with my own personal bias and result in the opposite conclusion.

Therefore, your "belief" in atheism is very similar to a "belief" in a God. You are correct that atheism is not a religion but in many cases neither is a belief in God.
TUDOR SHOULD PLS LEARN HOW TO ARGUE, AND PROPERLY, AS YOU CAN SEE I VE REFRAINED FROM USING ANY JIBES SORT OFF>>>THE HONEST TRUTH, ,  LOL

@TUDOR
I JUST READ THE RABID DOG COMMENT>>HILARIOUS>>>IF ONLY YOU PUT IN THE ENERGY AND TIME U USE IN INSULTING ME INTO RESEARCH LOL>>>NO COMMENTS BUT I BET U CAN DO BETTER THAN DAT>>>Do you think you could attempt at an insult that actualy stings or will it take you a few hours?"       I refuse to engage in a battle of knowledge and common sense with an unarmed man.


[/b][/font][/font][/color]

  see response!   

  Adaku has established that she is infact NOT a christian, but dagg, she is impressive! Atheists here should hire her to develop their arguements for them