Is Being Non-christian Another Religion?

[sojourner]

I am just going to throw this out there, hope it doesnt offend folks cause I really do care about you all.

 

It seems to me after being here a bit, that non-belief is as much a sect or relgion if you will than belief in something.

 

If its brought under scrutiny or questioned, it seems that the first thing I notice is a quick stance to rip at the one questioning rather than actual discussion. That doesnt seem to happen with most folks till after the questioner has passed thru some hoops if you will. lol

 

This is also classic in religion and christianity to me. And though there are folks here that believe many different beliefs and hold many different views, you seem to all have rallied around the one thing - being ex christian. I totally understand a need when you come out of something to have a place to group. But is that in itself become a sect ? Not sure if that would be the right word or not?

 

I guess my question is though, is unbelief just as much a religion as belief?

 

Is agnosticism and athiesm another ism and therefore another sect of religion in reality or not?

 

thats my question

 

not attacking, I hope you know that by now about me , truly asking how you all see this.

 

sojourner

[SWIM]

No, it's just that, well, this is ex-c. This is where people that *were* in the religion come to get together, not be preached too. When new folks get here claiming to be christian it sends up immediate red flags. That's why the initial barrage of questions, it is an attempt to un-mask them and reveal their true motives.

 

We don't defend our un-belief like a religion, rather we defend ourselves from being preached to, attempts at re-conversion are usually uncovered as fast as possible. It is a defense mechanism, but more of a "no, not gonna suck us in again" rather then "you must not-believe as us".

 

Make sense?

[Ouroboros]

Soj, just to warn you, expect very heated response from your topic now. This is a very hot potato and you will not find many that agree with you.

 

To give my diplomatic answer:

 

No, it's not another sect or religion, because what do you have that defines a sect and is missing in non-belief:

 

You have a leadership - that's missing here

 

You have a Holy Book of some kind - that's missing here

 

You pray to some higher diety - that's missing here

 

You believe in absolute truth and absolute knowledge and other absolutes - that's not necessary to be a non-believer

 

In a sect you have dogma, rules, traditions, a church, a huge structure of ideas that are the root of their belief - the only thing that ties non-believers together is a non-belief. We don't have the same life philosophies. We don't have the same goals, ideas, insight, tradition, political opinion etc...at all. We could even be enemies on the battle field, standing for two different views and yet be non-believers.

 

The problem is that you read into it more than it is. You look at a person and see the whole of his character and opinion, and you think that non-believe is equated to that whole persons view. That is wrong.

 

We don't believe Santa Claus is real, does it make us having a Christmas tradition of some other sort?

 

You have to understand there are Naturalism, Humanism and many other -isms that stands for morality, ethics and other things in life. They create the structure for a world view, and there you can (if you want) discuss "is it a religion or not". But No-Belief is ... NO Belief. How can that be a religion?

 

We don't try to convert anyone. We don't do mission trips. We don't knock doors, but mostly we don't pray and think we have to follow a higher law of some deity to fulfill our purpose in life. But it's important to know that it's up to each individual to establish his own life and his own beliefs outside of the non-theist belief.

 

Is non-zeusians a form of zeusians?

 

Another thing, not everyone one this website is a non-theist or non-believer. This website might contain 90% atheists, but it doesn't mean the other 10% are not Ex-Christians.

[Kuroikaze]

It should be no surprise that we still believe things after rejecting our previous religion, but as Han pointed out, we disagree on many things...and sometimes argue quite strongly about things with each other. (a good way to find out the truth IMO)

 

It shouldn't surprise you either that one of the few things we generally agree on is our opinions of the Christian religion (though even here we often disagree) As a rule most of us find particular beliefs in Christianity to be offensive or wrong, Hell, original sin and so on. I wouldn't therefor say we share a religion, however. Otherwise we would call political parties a religion.

[Vigile]

Don't confuse a fascination with the topic as a practiced religious belief. The anger you witness here could be:

 

1. Not anger at all, but your own projections on the writer's emotion.

2. A bi product of working through one's de conversion.

3. A low tolerance for stupidity.

[sojourner]

Ty for your replies, and I understand if I get some heated ones

 

Ok Hans, I can understand you but when you hit the we dont try to convert anyone, isnt that fudging it a little as in many here do try to deconvert folks. I even read one thread where the one guy was excited because he found that using the 'two different sets of commandments' seems to be a good method of opening a doorway into deconverting christians.

 

I know you cant lump everyone into one group here by any means, and probably shouldnt have used the word religion at all, just couldnt think of what word would fit. Unbelief would not be a religion, I understand.

 

Probably this is why I gravitate and respect some folks here so much that give me freedom just like I give them freedom and just like they dont feel me trying to convert them I dont sense them trying to deconvert me. But I cant say that with everyone here, and I guess that is one thing that makes me wonder. If anyone here is sincerely committed to deconvering others, then is that any different than those that come here to convert others?

 

You know?

 

anyhoo, thanks for responding

 

sojourner

[Everglaze]

A religion would be a group gathered together under one doctrine/set of instructions/set of beliefs/sacredness/tradition.

 

Being Ex-Christian takes after many different paths afterwards. How then are we considered a religion when each of us have newfound paths that aren't gathered under a single guideline? A mutual connection doesn't mean religion. Otherwise, anything can be called a religion as long as it involves agreeing parties. The fact that we have disbelief in Christianity means we now lack the practice of that religion, therefore, we are individualistic. Among ourselves, we are separated when it comes to beliefs.

[sojourner]

Soj, just to warn you, expect very heated response from your topic now. This is a very hot potato and you will not find many that agree with you.

 

Hans, just so you know in case I wasnt as clear, these are thoughts, not things I even know that I agree with yet. Just observations and I wanted to hear from you all how you would respond to my observations.

 

Why is it a hot potato? And are there threads you could point me to that I could read as this must have already been discussed?

 

sojourner

[crazy-tiger]

I am just going to throw this out there, hope it doesnt offend folks cause I really do care about you all.

 

It seems to me after being here a bit, that non-belief is as much a sect or relgion if you will than belief in something.

 

If its brought under scrutiny or questioned, it seems that the first thing I notice is a quick stance to rip at the one questioning rather than actual discussion. That doesnt seem to happen with most folks till after the questioner has passed thru some hoops if you will. lol

There's a reason, in my mind, as to that...

 

It's as Han said, there's a lot missing here that is, by definition, part of a religion/sect. But there's more to it... By trying to equate non-belief with a religion/sect, you use an argument that would have Bald a colour of hair. It's also, to some, implying that they are still in that from which they have escaped... which is going to raise a lot of heckles.

This is also classic in religion and christianity to me. And though there are folks here that believe many different beliefs and hold many different views, you seem to all have rallied around the one thing - being ex christian. I totally understand a need when you come out of something to have a place to group. But is that in itself become a sect ? Not sure if that would be the right word or not?

Certainly the wrong word... Group is by far the better one.

I guess my question is though, is unbelief just as much a religion as belief?

 

Is agnosticism and athiesm another ism and therefore another sect of religion in reality or not?

 

thats my question

Simple answer... is non-Alcoholism a form of Alcoholism?

not attacking, I hope you know that by now about me , truly asking how you all see this.

 

sojourner

Which, considering the topic, will hopefully be enough to protect you from the worst of the WMDs people keep on hand for this kind of question...

[Ouroboros]

Ok Hans, I can understand you but when you hit the we dont try to convert anyone, isnt that fudging it a little as in many here do try to deconvert folks.

Not many here do that at all. Maybe a few, but they're an exception. I'm of the opinion that I do NOT want to convert anyone. The reason being that it takes a strong mind, a lot of courage and I know that many lose their family, friends and get very lonely by doing it. I rather have an honest and truthful Christian that admit that he doesn't know, but just believe without reason, than an atheist that is miserable because I put him there. Secondly I think that a majority of people can NOT leave their beliefs. They need that extra little mystery or black-box to explain the things they don't understand. I don't need it. I can intuitively understand a lot of things, even when I can't explain it, but I don't need a supernatural belief to fill the gaps. We're different. And to claim we're a religion because a few gets into the futile attempts to de-convert believers is a stretch.

 

I even read one thread where the one guy was excited because he found that using the 'two different sets of commandments' seems to be a good method of opening a doorway into deconverting christians.

Well, it wasn't me. It's all on him, and I don't agree with it. It's an exception, not a rule that some want to de-convert people. I think it's a waste of time, and the end result might not be what I want anyway.

 

I know you cant lump everyone into one group here by any means, and probably shouldnt have used the word religion at all, just couldnt think of what word would fit. Unbelief would not be a religion, I understand.

Don't mistake passionate and strong opinions as the same things as religion. I think religion has influenced and infected your mind so much that you think (subconsciously) that there can't be any emotions, passion, love or any strong feelings outside a god-belief. And that my friend, is wrong, and you have to learn that passion is Human utility, unrelated to divine inspiration.

 

Probably this is why I gravitate and respect some folks here so much that give me freedom just like I give them freedom and just like they dont feel me trying to convert them I dont sense them trying to deconvert me. But I cant say that with everyone here, and I guess that is one thing that makes me wonder. If anyone here is sincerely committed to deconvering others, then is that any different than those that come here to convert others?

As I said. My belief (and a few others here) is that evolution caused religion to exist. It used to have some benefits to humanities survival. I believe it doesn't anymore. But it doesn't mean the genetic need automatically disappears because we don't need it. The human psyche requires beliefs and I can't undo it. Hence, I have to learn to live with it and use it instead.

 

With that said, when someone comes our website, it means there's a chance they're ready to talk about what they think and feel. It means that this person might have a shot at de-converting. I don't go out and search you out, but if you come here... you potentially got an interest in what the other side has to say, and that means maybe you doubt your beliefs.

[Ouroboros]

Hans, just so you know in case I wasnt as clear, these are thoughts, not things I even know that I agree with yet. Just observations and I wanted to hear from you all how you would respond to my observations.

I know.

 

Why is it a hot potato? And are there threads you could point me to that I could read as this must have already been discussed?

It's touchy, because most Christians want Non-Belief to be labeled as Belief and a religion, so they can claim "but you believe too" and "it takes more belief to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God" and so on. And it's frustrating and irritating, because it shows ignorance and a very childish mind set. It usually shows that the person has not taken a fraction of a second to think about what they say, but they just repeat what the preachers said in Sunday school. I'd say they're just platitude spewing robots, and I hate dishonesty, bigotry and hypocrisy, and it shows they have it in full. The reason why I hate it so much, is because I used to be exactly like that. I see myself in a mirror and I don't like what I see. I try to change myself, but I get reminded how ugly human nature is and I want them to wake up from their prideful narcissism.

[sojourner]

It's touchy, because most Christians want Non-Belief to be labeled as Belief and a religion, so they can claim "but you believe too"

 

oh wow, that never entered my thought process

 

no I am trying to understand if we as mankind just seem to move or migrate from one belief system to another, basically staying in one till it finally dawns on us it isnt all its cracked up to be and sometimes that comes thru much abuse and pain unfortunately, then moving on to another.

 

And if its possible that in moving on to another would that another also include , no God? just thoughts I am trying to understand

 

sojourner

[Thurisaz]

Sojourner,

 

don't forget please that many people here have been, one way or another, victims of the jebus cult.

 

What if what you might perceive as attacks on christianity are really defensive actions against what is seen as just another cultist babbling the same old shit that had sucked them in for so damn long?

 

Never having been a morontheist I understand where you're coming from, maybe better than many others here, maybe not. I do agree with you inasmuch as the flak a new believer is bound to catch upon entering here often seems exaggerated...

 

...but then, would I do the same if I had been a victim once? Honestly, I consider it very likely that I would.

 

 

 

I mean, hey, I do join the fight even though the only christianity I've ever been part of was of the liberal kind

 

Seriously, I'm not surprised at all that people who have been victimized feel a certain urge to both strike preemptively at whatever looks like the source of their pain, and to avenge the wrongs done to them. Is that right? Or just? Strictly speaking, no. But it's very very human.

[sojourner]

Hey Guys, I found this on another thread and it really is describing exactly what my thought processes are but Antlerman is just so danged good at putting things in words so here is a quote of his from the pragmathiesm thread

 

This is the goal. Establishing common ground, rather than defining lines of difference. That means a loosening of grips on the gods of each side: the gods of theists and the gods of atheists (irony intended). They can still believe in them if they wish, but to be put into a position of defending their symbols, leads people to build walls to defend their language, and in so doing begin to violate the underlying purpose of the respective languages are really for. It happens whether it's the religionist driving away all threats to their symbols, or the atheists driving away all religionists who threaten theirs. It all just language systems for god's sake! For the most part we have far more in common, than not. Why build on the differences? Do we like being divided? Are we so weak in what works for us, that we need to have others be "wrong"? It's when the symbols become the focus of the religion and not what the symbols point to, that they fail.

 

This describes why I had those questions.

 

sojourner

[SWIM]

In talking about de-conversion. Yes I am guilty of trying to do this. Note the difference between "deconversion and *conversion*). I see xtianity as a dangerous cult. If I can help someone out if their delusion, so they can be free to think on their own, be it agnostic or atheist, then I will.

 

Freeing someone from a form of mental illness (delusion) is not a bad thing, nor is it conversion to any set belief.

 

I have *nothing* to offer a potentual de-convert except freedom. That's it. Even my own personal philosophies are just *speculation* so I bring nothing at all to the table as an alternative, except maybe freedom to ponder and live life on your own, free of dogma and religious rules.

 

I do *not* condon nor encourage anti-social behaviour. No *normal* person would. It seems I guess similar on the surface to recruiting, but I personally am not trrying to "get more people in my camp", rather I would anyone effected by me and my bullshit, I would rather they start to think *dogma free* so they can enjoy life without chains, to be free to ponder or dismiss lifes mysteries.

 

So yeah, I am guilty of trying to de-convert, and I will continue to do so in the spirit of what I stated above.

[sojourner]

Thanks Thurisoz

 

[sojourner]

Michael,

 

I really do understand the desire to have others get free of what we were also in bondage to that they are indeed still wrapped up in.

 

I see fundimentalism this way, however, just speaking for me and this is what gets me wearing the 'she just tries to fit in' label when I go places, I just believe from how Ive come to view scripture and life experiance, that another is in control of that process.

 

I have trust and faith because of my beliefs in a good God and universalism that He will bring all men to belief in His own time. Therefore, I share what I have but in no way evangelise or try and convert because then I might find myself working against the very one that I believe is in control.

 

just my own personal way about me.......and this is another thing

 

no matter where I go because I dont operate out of an us and them mindset so much, I can fit in easily without compromising my beliefs. Really Im letting off steam with some parts in this post in this thread as to how some of my universalist brothers see me as a compromiser or 'fit in'r' haha

that bugs me.

 

I can very much respect wanting to set others free for sure Michael.

 

Even some fundies if you will are operating out of a very real desire to see others set free too. Not all of them want an athiest notch on their belts.

 

sojourner

[Antlerman]

It seems to me after being here a bit, that non-belief is as much a sect or relgion if you will than belief in something.

Not much time to post thoughts, so I'll be brief. It can be like a religion depending on where the person is at. I've seen atheists who are as much fundamentalist in their thinking as some Christians are. My short response to it is personality types or emotional needs. People join fundamentalist churches for a reason. It's because it appeals to a certain type of thinking. They aren't made fundamentalists, but they are attracted to organizations that support that type of thinking. So when someone abandons Christianity, they may just simply transfer a leaning to black and white thought to something else. For me, one of the things to led me to leaving fundamentalist Christianity was a change in entire mode of thinking.

 

All this of course, is excluding that part of the process of deconverting and healing which may entail throwing all you eggs into another basket. It's just that after awhile, it would be healthy to move beyond into living life rather than serving a new religion.

[Deva]

Probably this is why I gravitate and respect some folks here so much that give me freedom just like I give them freedom and just like they dont feel me trying to convert them I dont sense them trying to deconvert me. But I cant say that with everyone here, and I guess that is one thing that makes me wonder. If anyone here is sincerely committed to deconvering others, then is that any different than those that come here to convert others?

 

You know?

 

anyhoo, thanks for responding

 

sojourner

 

This just doesn't sit well with me. Something in this sounds a bit condescending.

 

We have not personally tried to deconvert others, but can certainly understand why an ex-christian would want to do so, seeing the damage christianity has wrought in their lives. Why should you care so much about whether or not someone tries to deconvert someone else on this site? This is our place. No one asked you to come on here and start questioning us about our similarity to a "religion."

[Monk]

If its brought under scrutiny or questioned, it seems that the first thing I notice is a quick stance to rip at the one questioning rather than actual discussion. That doesnt seem to happen with most folks till after the questioner has passed thru some hoops if you will. lol

 

 

In my experience, the "debates," if YOU will, spiral into ad hominem because many of the christian posters are unreasonable in every sense of the word. They won't listen to logical rebuttals, nor will they present ANY proof (outside the bible) when asked for it. They are condescending, arrogant, and, more often than not, the rudeness begins on their end. They come in here to "save" us knowing full well that this is an EX-christian site, and that we have heard everything they'll say 1000 times before. Are there exceptions? Absolutely.

 

But what would you recommend? Tolerate their incessant bs or put them in their place (either with kind words or violent vitriol)? Some folks on here will only tolerate so much. And if we tend to gang up on christians and take care of our own, well, what's wrong with that? People are tribal by nature. You SHOULD take care of your own. Not to mention that, last time I checked, we atheists/agnostics/deists/etc., here are in a major minority. We have to stick together. Divide and conquer.

 

We aren't a cult, a religion, and "ism," or anything of the kind....just a group of people with similar intellectual philosophies and ideologies who watch each other's backs.

 

That's my take.

[Monk]

I even read one thread where the one guy was excited because he found that using the 'two different sets of commandments' seems to be a good method of opening a doorway into deconverting christians.

 

 

I think I know the one you're talking about, and I think I may have been involved. It's not about de-converting as in proselytizing. It's about bringing a little logic and reason into christian's lives. I agree with Hans...I don't want to de-convert anyone in the sense that you mean, because I am painfully aware of the consequences. I just want people to be more informed about the religion that they MINDLESSLY follow. If they heed that type of knowledge then, yes, that would probably lead to de-conversion. But it's not the same as proselytizing. We are NOT offering the one "way, truth, and light" towards any kind of salvation.

[1_individual]

Hi Soj.

 

I'm not going to try to construct the mother of all replies here, or brow beat anybody (including you) for their excellent thoughts and feedback. But rather 3 or 4 bullet points that make sense to me.

 

I used to feel the Atheism was a religion, back in my fundy days. It's true how it is trumped up religionists so that there is an enemy to do battle with. But now it's clear that Athiesm has only the most minimal of similarity/relationship to religion or spirituality. Even though there are ass-holes who would/could kill for their "religion" of non-religion. My definition of ass-hole – Existence without empathy, sympathy or kindness. I may have read this somewhere, so I won't take any credit.

 

1) "Believing in" _______ is not the same as having belief that certain objects, events, or people have certain properties, behave in a predictable manner and produce a given outcome. I.E "I believe (based on historical evidence) that the sun will rise tomorrow." but I don't believe the sun or has any mythical or supernatural significance than that. Religion mandates the first type of belief.

2) There's no necessity of a hierarchical,political or social structure for Atheism.

3) There's no reliance/relationship on/to the supernatural

4) The most basic constructs are those on which logic, reasoning and analysis can be built upon.

 

All this being said. I consider myself an Agnostic. Not sure why, but, like you said in one of your replies, I may even change that too at some point in the future.

 

Peace and good-will,

"Life is a sandbox... go play"

Frank

[Ouroboros]

Soj,

 

I can see that you're starting to understand. To be an atheist is not to create a new religion. But to be a fundamentalist atheist can definitely be a new religion to a person. So to the initial question you have if atheism and agnosticism is just a new religion, the answer is no, but of course people can build their own delusions even from that starting point. Just look into Raelians. They are atheists, but they have a whacky religion.

 

Also, you are a non-believer just like us. You don't believe in Santa Claus, which makes you a a-santa-ist, and that my friend would make you a christmastolog and a believer in x-mas. You see, it doesn't work. A non-belief doesn't automatically make you a believer of something else, it only is a step away from a belief, but from there people take different routes. (And I assume you don't believe in Thor, Odin or Freia either... does it make you an Asatruer?)

[sojourner]

It seems to me after being here a bit, that non-belief is as much a sect or relgion if you will than belief in something.

Not much time to post thoughts, so I'll be brief. It can be like a religion depending on where the person is at. I've seen atheists who are as much fundamentalist in their thinking as some Christians are. My short response to it is personality types or emotional needs. People join fundamentalist churches for a reason. It's because it appeals to a certain type of thinking. They aren't made fundamentalists, but they are attracted to organizations that support that type of thinking. So when someone abandons Christianity, they may just simply transfer a leaning to black and white thought to something else. For me, one of the things to led me to leaving fundamentalist Christianity was a change in entire mode of thinking.

 

All this of course, is excluding that part of the process of deconverting and healing which may entail throwing all you eggs into another basket. It's just that after awhile, it would be healthy to move beyond into living life rather than serving a new religion.

 

Thank you! That really hits on something that I think is at the center of my question. It is a type of thinking that is in all religions and anti religions isnt it? How would you define that way of thinking, I would be interested to know what you see as the center of it or what feeds it if you will? Is it control? To control something in this life whether its others or ourselves?

 

Antlerman if I were a better educated and better spoken person I would give myself to bridging these gaps that we see together. I have never been a catholic and in fact have alot of problems with the religion in general. However one day I was in the bookstore and ran across a book, the biography of Bede Griffiths. He was a friend of Tolkein, Lewis and George MacDonald (Love George Macdonalds writings, he is a very well known universalist and Lewis mentor) anyways, Bede Griffiths packed up all his belongings and moved to India. The thing I loved about him was he didnt move with a drive to evangelize India. And in fact adopted their culture as his own. Began to see many beautiful truths that mirrored his own in their religion of hinduism. He lived out the rest of his life on an Ashram, learning and writing books of which I have most of them.

 

He is my type hero, because there is something about building bridges without a need to force others into our own views that totally captivates me.

 

anyways, rambled enough

 

sojourner

[Deva]

Some folks on here will only tolerate so much. And if we tend to gang up on christians and take care of our own, well, what's wrong with that? People are tribal by nature. You SHOULD take care of your own. Not to mention that, last time I checked, we atheists/agnostics/deists/etc., here are in a major minority. We have to stick together. Divide and conquer.

 

We aren't a cult, a religion, and "ism," or anything of the kind....just a group of people with similar intellectual philosophies and ideologies who watch each other's backs.

 

That's my take.

 

Monk, I am in total agreement with this statement. Way to go!! Sojourner, not having to break away from a childhood raised in fundamentalism, I sincerely doubt you can understand the mental toughness necessary to overcome such a deficent background and how it impacted our lives.