Tag Archives: Religion

Is atheism a religion?

12 Feb


Is atheism a religion? “Yes”, many theist would say. “No”, would most atheist. I would say “yes and no”. I will now explain why.

Atheism is not a religion like theism is not a religion.


I have said to many atheist “freethinkers” that they are a religion. This I do mostly to annoy them and they are really easy to flame. I do think that much of atheism is religious, and I will get back to that, but first I will point out some truthful distinctions.

Atheism, in its purest and most narrow of definitions, is only the philosophical metaphysical belief/knowledge that there is NO god(s).

In this sense it would be true that “atheism is a religion like off is a channel“; A saying that is a popular atheist meme* that you will probably encounter soon, should you try to call them religious.

So I do not disagree with this tautology. In fact the same can be said about the stand of theism. “Theism is no more a religion than on is a channel“. It is just the antonyms of atheism, thus just “the philosophical metaphysical belief/knowledge that there IS god(s)

The point of pointing out this is to show that believing or not believing is in itself not religious, but, as I now will try to show, most atheist are highly religious.

When is atheism religious?

As I have said, believing or not believing in a god is not religious in itself, but still I like to call a number of atheist religious. Why I think this is necessary, and how come I think this is true, I will now share.

Its not a question of IF atheism is a religion, but when is atheism a religion?

According to wikipedia, religion is defined as such: “Religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to the supernatural, and to spirituality.

Check mate, AndyAce83.

It specifically says “the supernatural, and to spirituality.” and as I should know, atheist dont believe in the supernatural. They may belive in a kind of “spirituality” like “we are all connected, we are all stardust“, but still its hard to say that atheist have a spiritual side since the soul or spirit can not exist without a sort of “supernatural” route (although they will talk about a soul whenever it soothes their purpose).

The point is that “supernatural” and “spiritual” is very loaded words that I think we should be skeptical to use in the definition of religion. Being skeptical is very important in atheist communities, but somehow I dont think this is what they had in mind. But there are other definitions of religion that is not defined by the last editor of the wiki article.

Clifford Geertz for instance defined religion as

“(1) a system of symbols (2) which acts to establish powerful, pervasive and long-lasting moods and motivations in men (3) by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.”


With this definition atheism can be clearly religious, but of course, like most definitions, it may be disputed as well. Especially by people who can see that this definition can be used against their belief.


I do, though, believe that religion and being religious is NOT based on belief in “supernatural” or “spirituality”.

I believe there have been UFO cults around that is not “supernatural” although we may not believe in UFOs ourselves and although we as outsiders may think of thetan readings as mumbojumbo BS but to the Church of Scientology this is “highly scientific“. As you may know, Scientology says they are “just an alternative to psychology”.

Like most definitions of human endeavors (aka. humaniora or “the soft sciences”) religion is just a matter of perception and what is important to us. For atheist, it is very important to be critical and skeptical to religion and therefor the notion that they themselves may be just that, can be a hard thought to grasp.

So if we, for the sake of argument, refute the wikipedia definition of “spiritual and supernatural” and instead focus on Geertz´s definition, can atheism be seen as a religion?

The many signs and symbols of atheism (stolen from http://signsanddisplays.wordpress.com/ )

The many signs and symbols of atheism (stolen from http://signsanddisplays. wordpress.com/ )

The first defining characteristic of religion by Geertz was “(1) a system of symbols”. Do atheist have a system of symbols? The first kind of symbol we think of is the iconographic symbols of the cross, the jewish star, the islamic moon, the wheel of Dharma or the “fat guy” in Buddhism. Do atheist have such symbols? Yes, lots of them.

They have the “happy human” of humanism, they have the A+ symbol, the darwin fish, the pastafarian etc. They have an endless amount of symbols to represent their faith.

But much of this is parody“, you may say. Yes, and the need to parody, ridicule and pervert other peoples beliefs is a cornerstone in the atheist religious practice. The tradition of being a smug besserwisser is one of their biggest traditions. And traditions is “a belief or behavior passed down within a group or society with symbolic meaning” [wikipedia].

I have debated alot of atheist, not to convert them, but to put them in their place. I dont care what people belive as long as the accept other peoples point of view and dont force their convictions down others throats. Atheist are the most preachy and proselyting group I have ever encountered. They are aggressive and rude.
Anyway, debating these atheist for a long time one starts to discover patterns in their way of debating. They aren´t really defending their position as much as attacking and ridiculing others view. When you demand they defend their views they will usually become very quiet or go to what I call the “atheist safespace”.

The “atheist safespace” is regurgitating what has been said many times before. They may say “you can´t prove a negative” or “atheism is a religion like off is a channel” or something about “talking snakes” or quotes from the bible they do not like. They love to point out part of history where theistic religions have done dirty deeds, but when people try to point out the many atheistic miss-deeds, its never really atheism cuz atheism is just “disbelief”. A disbelief they are very passionate about.

Being blinded by ones own religious nature is a very religious thing indeed. And atheist hate it with passion to be called out on their religious behaviors. That is why I do it constantly. Not because I cant respect or understand their point of view, but because they can not respect mine.

Again… Not all atheist are religious anymore than all theist. Its just a philosophical understanding of the world. It is behaviour that defines wether or not they be the religious type.

Do they need to preach their beliefs everywhere they go? Can they not show any tolerance for other peoples ideas and beliefs? Do they look for kindred spirits and unite in their beliefs? Do they sing songs about their cause and belief? Do they have a utopic vision of how the world would be if their ideas were the dominating one? Do they quote scriptures (The God Delusion, God Is Not Great, Letter to a Christian Nation) and prophets of their beliefs (Doc Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris etc?) like it has some kind of profound meaning? Do they have symbols in their avatars to indicate their belief? Are they passionate about their ideas and think they are surely and unquestionably right? Have they extremist among them willing to kill for atheism? Have they ritualized ridicule? Do they belive that anything positive about their belief is unquestionable truth, but anything that proves negative sides are ignored (confirmation bias)?

Many atheist have much if not all of these traits. That is why they are religious. If atheism is “just a disbelief” why then is it so important to them to put their atheism out there? Why is atheism such a character trait to them that they have to add it to their bio? Its just disbelief after all.

So you may or may not agree with me that atheism is a religion. Perhaps because of religious reason? But why is it important to me that we recognize atheism as a religion “like off is a channel”? It has to do with debates on value and culture.

You see there is a reason why atheist think its important to be seen as non-religious; It gives them the neutral position. The unbiased position. Their causes and agendas will be seen by them as the honest and impartial one. For the “good of everyone”, when in fact its just for themselves.

Their fight for secularity has the aura of being non-partisan. Usually its the respect towards minorities like Islam, Judaism or misc. (“Hindu. There are seven hundred million of us.” Aww, that’s super.) But they arent fighting for secularity out of some respect for minor religions, they are fighting for secularity for themselves. They want to dominate the western culture. They want to be able to preach their world view without being questioned.

To religious atheist secularity is ultimate. There should be no references to God in schools, hospitals or anywhere. The atheist get to mock other religions, but they themselves should never be mocked. Cuz they are the perfect stand. There is nothing funny about being right.

They are blinded by their own religious nature, and that can be dangerous. They project their bigotry unto religious people to a fascinating degree. They say that Christians try to force their beliefs down others throat, but all I see is atheist trying to convert others trough mockery and aggressive argumentation. They are NOT religious, they say with a passion that can only be seen as religious.


Blog 2.0 -  "You are so wrong Andy! As Sam Harris said in his letter to a Christian nation: "Blablablablablabla". Amen!"

Blog 2.0 – “You are so wrong Andy! As Sam Harris said in his letter to a Christian nation: “Blablablablablabla”. Amen!”

(*After debating with lots of atheist it has befallen me that most of their arguments are meme based. The same quotations and arguments have been said countless times without much rewriting or paraphrasing. My theory is that most “new atheist” or born “again atheist” have read a sort of “atheist cannon” and also by sharing beliefs on forums also teach each other these arguments. These forums tend to be like the Christian sunday schools or bible study where they teach each other the theories of godlessness to strengthen their faith.)

The Atheist slayer; Song 2 – The AngryAtheist strikes back!!

12 Jul

So I wrote the epic tale of “AndyAce83 – Atheist Slayer! or; “the song of Dilt4; the nerd who believed he could!“. The story of the epic battle between a smug know-it-all and his friends against one single theist (me). The battle was long and ferocious. I decided to post another tale, but this time only the transcripts. It´s the battle between me and the smug know.it-all Digijedi569. As usual the battle ground was youtube (as I do not walk into the gates of Reddit).

I am the atheist slayer. I take many a “freethinker” to school. My strategy is as simple as it is brilliant. Spit the same poision back into their faces. I give back with the same amount of anger and hate as they do.

Now if you are a Christian you may want to point out “turn the other cheek” and that is true, but you are forgetting that we are also given a sword (words). We need to fight this horrible evil philosophy as its growing stronger and stronger everyday. More and more dumb teens want to become smug know-it-alls.

I am the atheist slayer. I am not afraid of fools.

The story begins when the angry nerd known as theamazingatheist or theangryatheist as would be a more fitting name for him.

As he always does he rants about something in a way only a degenerate would. And as most loudmouth degenerate, he gets followers who are just as degenerate and loudmouth.

To my original comment,

Oh, a liberal atheist? That’s new. What’s next; an atheist communist? An atheist mass-murderer and oppressor of the masses? An atheist without moral? Oh, wait… That’s not new, that was the atheist default.
that had “received too many negative votes” so it was hidden; Digijedi569 wrote…

empathy > morals
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

So you think angryatheist show much of either? I think I saw him making fun of a plane accident (air france) just after it happened by fake crying and being a complete ass. Please refrain from pretending he and his supporters are better than they truly are. I can agree that empathy is a great compass for people who have any, those who have none should follow morals. Get it?
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

No, everyone should have empathy, whether or not they have morals. Got it?
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

You´re one dumb fuck aren´t you? 
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

I guess if you want to call me one, tell yourself whatever you wish. Life is just one big fantasy. Maybe though, you could try having some empathy.
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

Then I will call you that, Thanks.
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

Though, must I remind you fantasy is just that, fantasy, not reality. In reality, I could be anybody, but since this is the internet, you do not know me, but if it lets you sleep at night, then you go right ahead and lie to yourself until you believe it.
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

I thought we agreed? I thought you said it was fine for me to call you a dumb fuck, now you suddenly want to defend yourself? That’s two dumb fuck strikes! If you fail another time there will be strengthened theory of your cognitive abilities. Give it up while your ahead (I know you won’t and that will be dumb fuck strike #3)
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

Try empathy out, as I am just a total stranger, and you are “seemingly” a failed troll. Trolling is childish, so are you a child? Maybe not, you are able to use big words, so I am guessing you are pissed off about something? Might you tell me what? And all of a sudden I am a dumb fuck because I simply said “empathy > morals” and you took it out of context? Then you said by defending myself, automatically makes me a dumb fuck even more? I cant win with you, you are just an asshole, fuck off.
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

Listen to me, Digijedi569, your argument is invalid! U see to call for empathy from me, under an angryatheist video is nonsense. Angryatheist is one of the LEAST empathic or moral persons on youtube. He is in every meaning of the word a degenerate! Why atheist think he would be a wise spokesperson for their belief is beyond me. Even stiff Dawkins is more relatable than this angry loon. U are not a dumb fuck for saying that, u are a dumb fuck for not understanding I agreed with u, u dumb fuck!
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

Forgive me for not actually allowing you to call me a dumb fuck. No I wasn’t actually agreeing with you, I was being sarcastic. Yeah,The Amazing Atheist is sort of an ass,but he does it for show, he is an actor, he only acts like that to get peoples attention so they listen to what he has to say. I guarantee you if he had his own show on FOX news, he would be one calm, Christian, motherfucker. He makes some good points, some I don’t agree with, but the one I personally liked was empathy > morals
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

U are NOT forgiven. I should be allowed to call a dumb fuck, a dumb fuck. U´re a dumb fuck cuz you where looking for an argument so you couldn´t acknowledge that the opposition was agreeing with you and had to spit out the same argument only this time even more poisonous. Thats also, ironically, a lack of empathy. To say “We need to be good” do not make you good. theangryatheist is the second least empathic & moral person I have seen on the internet (the first was another atheist from sweden).
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

And also, 20 people agree with me, that you are fucking stupid. You lose this argument, I am sorry for you, it will be fine, just log off YouTube, get a glass of water, maybe a small snack, turn on the television, maybe play a game, watch something funny, maybe even get up go outside, but when you are done, make sure to not be angry, or at least try working on being stupid.
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

U atheist with ur collective thinking. To quote a book ” To be in a minority of one doesn’t make you mad”. You atheist are only a breath away from communism and all you do is try to make the book 1984 to be about religion when in fact its about a godless world where the state becomes the religion (you see the human faults are constant, meaning if you remove religion something else becomes religion). To believe I lose an argument because others agree with u is just insane. And sad! Yes, very sad.
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

And take your high and mighty wisdom, and cram it up your ass.
Digijedi569 in reply to AndyAce83

Not after its been up yours.
AndyAce83 in reply to Digijedi569

Ofcourse Digijedi569 didn´t learn his lesson. Most atheist are too stubborn and argumentativ to learn anything. But it goes to show how dumb they are. That is their biggest weakness – To be shown what they truly are; Animalistic, stupid and hateful.

Blog 2.0 – Not afraid of fools

About Lady Gaga´s Judas.

20 Apr

She, Lady Gaga, has been “controversial” again.


It´s important to be controversial. Make headlines for some reasons. Thank God for religions or no one would be offended by anything. Think about that!

Well that it´s not completely true. There are many other groups, other than religions, that are easily offended by different subjects. Feminist would be angered by any women degraded without consent. Animal right movements would be offended by art, music etc that would have animal cruelty. Political left would be offended by… everything that doesn´t fit their world view. Right wing… well that goes without saying.

I think it´s a good thing that people get offended. It makes life exciting!

So back to Lady Gaga´s new song, soon to be video, “Judas“. The song is about Judas (dah!). Most likely this Judas is Judas Iscariot, the betrayer of Jesus Christ in the canonical gospels of the bible. The one that made Jesus crucified during Easter about 2000 years ago.

Judas has had different portrayals through the years. Originally he was a man who´s actions are only known through biblical stories. There seems to be the dogmatic interpretation that he betrayed Jesus for money, but other apocryphal stories tell about a deeper plot involving a plan between Jesus and Judas for the prophecy to become true. Since the occult (hidden truth) does fascinate many people, these “hidden truth” have been made it into many debates and some even claim that Judas was good.

I don´t know what happened 2000 years ago, and I would not speculate on whether or not Judas betrayed Jesus for money or as a plan between him and Jesus. What I do know is that if Judas hadn´t betrayed Jesus, Jesus would not have died (at least not without a lot of violence), so there is a theological, artistic and philosophical question to explorer of Judas importance and faith in the gospels.

And this has been explored many times… The one that fascinates me the most is the Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar. In this musical, Judas has a greater role than in most of the Gosbels, where he is has just a supporting role. In Jesus Christ Superstar it is Judas´s downfall that get´s the most attention, not Jesus´s suffering, like most passion plays.

And now, as if never done before, Lady Gaga provokes people with her song that seems to be about a sort of love-attraction to Judas the Betrayer. I say “people”, but media has portrayed it as if Christian religions as a whole have been aggravated by this little song.

I have not been. I was in fact more irritated by “Born this way” because of it´s very liberal lyrics. But that to has faded.

So what is Lady Gaga´s intentions with this song?

To answer this question we should perhaps ask another question first: Is it IMPORTANT what Lady Gaga´s intentions was?

I would answer yes and no.

Yes, because to me any artistic or creative text (be that music, painting, film etc) is something that is communicated. And when something is communicated one should out of politeness or interest try to understand what it is that is trying to be said. Lady Gaga tries to say something here, what it is needs, as in any communication, to be interpreted.

No, because art is autonomous (it is what it is) and trying to find the creator in the creation can be hard for anyone and one can be wrong.

So if we remove Gaga from the song Judas, what does the story of lyrics tell?
A girl sings about being in love with Judas. The name Judas goes again and again in the song as the name has some deeper meaning. Is the woman in love with his name? Is it meant as a mantra, incantation or just to symbolize a persistent repetition? She then mention “gaga” and sort of forces the singer into the interpretation, but for now I will still leave Lady Gaga out of this song.

The verses are about darkness, violent attractions, stultification and betrayal. In the last verse we also hear repugnance and that the singer moves away from this destructive feelings and instead towards Jesus. But that Judas, as a demon, is still something that the singer needs.

The chorus apart from the repetitions of Judas is about being a “holy fool” that is attracted to someone (Judas) who is so cruel. “Holy fool” could be a reference to any religious person or that the singer is a religious agnostic (someone who are following the religious dogmas but don´t understand them). Either way it seems to be a contrast in this song between wanting to do right, but needing to do wrong. Right being personified by Jesus and wrong being personified by Judas. A sort of human duality between ideal virtues and the animalistic sexual. Apart from the last verse it would seem that the singer is loosing herself to her dark side, but there is a constant battle between the two sides.

So if we place Lady Gaga into the song, what is it she is trying to say?

I think it´s important to mentions Lady Gaga´s love with another figure; Madonna. Not the ikon, but the singer. Throughout her carrier she has made constant reference to this other singer in her videos and also through her songwriting and music. I would take a guess and say that the song Judas is a pastiche of Madonnas song Like A Prayer. “Like a prayer” was a controversial song who also used religious symbols and icons in a way that caused quite a stir. Judas could be seen as a continuation of this thought.

The song Judas is not atheist in tone or lyrics as it does not question divinity or the truth of the gospels. It does however question religion and make christian mythology about sex and being earthly, simple, sexual orientated as represented here by Judas. It does seem that Lady Gaga admits her need for a religion that accepts everyone and everything, even betrayal. The song, although it is ambiguous, does not seem to be about asking for forgiveness for her urges, but acceptance. This is a common wish for reformation of religion; to remove the laws, and accept everything.

So although this song is not atheist, I am not so sure about Lady Gaga. In the song the singer (here not referring to Lady Gaga) calls herself a “Holy Fool”. Another music video from Lady Gaga, “Born This Way”, from the same album as Judas, there are alot of symbols that could be inturbted as atheist.

In the very first image we see on screen we see a pink triangle with a transparent unicorn inside. This could be the icon of an atheist mock deity called “the invisible pink unicorn“. What´s strange is that the song is about how “God made us perfect as He makes no mistakes”. But she does reference the “religion of the insecure” what ever that religion is.

If she believes in a god, it is probably not the Christian, as much of her thoughts are as far away from the bibles as even the most liberal of interpretations could contain.

In fact, I would say, quite the opposite. You can only wish to change so much of something before you have to make a decision that this or that choice is perhaps not for you. That anymore reformation will change the entire thing to something completely different (i.e. I wish I had a car that didn’t drive on a road but instead flew in the air. That is an airplane!). So I would say that not only is she not a theist, she is probably an atheist. But of course I have never spoken to her and I probably never will. So for now, and always, I just have to watch her expressions and interpreted.

So these are my thoughts on this song. Now here is Lady Gaga – Judas


Blog 2.0 - Writes long and hard about nothing.

PS: Someone may comment that I may have interpreted to much into a simple song. That, for instance, the constant use of Judas is not meant as more than being catchy. Of course! But when one interpret a song one can not take anything for granted. One has to ask the question “What does this do/mean?“, not “Why was it placed there?” as the latter only Lady Gaga and the once who made it can answer.