Atheists Who Hijack Eastern Religions

Atheists Who Hijack Eastern Religions

        There are a fair amount of internet atheists who love to claim that eastern religions are “atheistic” and acceptable to them, and that such religions are far better for the world than Christianity. You can find such atheists on youtube as well as internet forums. These kinds of atheists speak out of ignorance. They make claims that religions like Buddhism, Jainism, Taosim, Confusionism, and Shintoism are all just forms of atheism. If one takes a closer look into these religions they will find out that eastern religions are in no way compatible with atheism because atheism is naturalistic in its philosophy on the universe. The website gives the defenitions of naturalism:

“a. the view of the world that takes account only of natural elements and forces, excluding the supernatural or spiritual.
b. the belief that all phenomena are covered by laws of science and that all teleological explanations are therefore without value.” (
By this defenition it is apparent that anything to do with finding purpose, meaning, or believing in final causes as well as spiritual issues do not fall into the category of atheism. All of the above mentioned religions do, or at least were founded by people groups who did. All of these worldviews believe in the idea of a soul as well; atheists don’t. Let us look into some of the basic beliefs of these religions.
        Janism is a religion that teaches that the unisverse does not have a creator. It “puts human beings and their concerns at its very centre. It teaches that the universe is eternal, and that it does not have a creator” (Cambridge Illustrated History, 2002, p. 58). This may sound atheistic, but a closer look will tell you that it is not compatible with atheism. Jainism teaches that gods exist in a system of heavens and are worshiped. The universe is split up between the soul of humans (jive) and the material things (non-jive). The soul in its essence is total knowledge, energy, and bliss. The goal is for the human soul to escape karma just like Buddhism and Hinduism. Jainists worship the images of tirthankaras which are liberated souls, teachers, monks, and preceptors. This is not a naturalistic or atheistic view of the universe. Jainism is not compatible with atheism.
        Buddhism is a popular religion for internet atheists to claim their own. But looking deeper it totally contradicts atheism. Buddhism teaches an irrational and illogical view of the universe. Atheists pride themselves in being logical and rational humans, yet the ones who try to hijack Buddhism and claim it as an atheistic system are doing it in error. They want to claim that Buddhism is just a philosophy and that Buddha himself never wanted to be worshiped (we don’t know if he did not want to be worshiped, but he did not command it). But there is more to the religion than a simple philosophy and Buddha was not an atheist as he also believes in karma and reincarnation.
        Buddhism claims that understanding cannot be obtained by physical or objective evidence or truth. This totally contradicts the atheist’s belief in a rational, logical and scientific outlook on nature.  There are two major sects of Buddhism: Theravada and Mahayana. In Buddhism, “Phenomena exist ‘objectively,’ but there are worlds and beings beyond the normal experience” (The Encyclopedia of World Faiths, 1989, p. 228). The ideas of spirits, ghosts, and deities exist. “In Buddhism there are five states of existences, the good states of deity and humanity and the evil states of animal, hungry ghost (Preta), and denizen of hell” (The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions, 1981, p. 126). While Buddha may not have actually told people to worship him, many Buddhists do. The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions states,
“In Mahayana Buddhism [there is the idea] of an eternal Buddha who embodies the absolute truth…the Lotus Sutra teaches that Buddha has lived since the beginningless time and will live for countless ages in the future…[he] manifests himself from time to time as an earthly Buddha to live and work among men” (p. 129).
This is none other than Buddha basically being god hence why he is called “Lord Buddha.” This is not atheism. Also, the idea of superstitions, spirits, illogical thought, escaping reincarnation by following morals and religious laws all negate an atheistic outlook. Buddhism is not compatible with atheism.
         Shintoism is a Japanese religion that believes in gods called kami as well as superstitious ideas. It is absurd that some internet atheists would claim Shinto as atheistic. The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions (1981) states,
A characteristic feature of Shinto is the notion of the kami. Mythological accounts give a picture of the kami as dwelling in heaven or inhabiting the earth as the sacred forces within nature…the Emperor is formally considered a ‘manifest kami’ because of his direct descent from the Sun Goddess” (p. 683).
Obviously this contradicts atheism as Japanese Shintoists would, and still do, pray to such gods and goddesses as well as Buddha and other spirits.  They practice ritual prayers which are magical formulas and incantations that have the power to bless crops, territories, and help a person to avoid ill-fortune. Shintoism is not compatible with atheism.
         There are two types of Taoism: philosophical and religious. The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions says,
“[P]hilosophical Taoism accepts death because it is a natural occurence and an occasion to return to the Tao, whereas religious Taoism resists death by practicing Alchemy in order to achieve physical immortality…Philosophical Taoism is rational, contemplative, and nonsectarian; whereas religious taoism is magical, cultic, esoteric, and sectarian.” 
        Philosophical Taoism is simply a philosophy based on the writngs of the Tao Te Ching. For atheists to adopt a philosophy that is not religious may seem like compatible worldviews. But in reality Taoism lacks the logical, empirical evidence Atheists claim to use for their worldview. Taosim makes the claim in the Yin and Yang (that opposites co-exist and are interdependent in the natural world). This is the teaching of dualism which claims that everything exists in physical and non-physical forms. Most internet atheists will claim that all processes of the mind are due to chemical reactions in the brain responding to stimuli. This contradicts atheism.
        Also, whether one likes it or not traditional Taoism was created by the extremely religious culture of ancient China. The ancient Chinese believed in ancestral spirits, all kinds of gods, and even demons. There is a whole pantheon of dieties in Taoist religion. Taoism was not made by people with an atheistic intention and was not meant to be an expression of atheism either, but it was created to give thoughts on how to live well. Taosim is not based on the logic that atheists pride themselves in and basically has no defenition. It simply claims to be “the Way” (as in the way things are. It is what it is). Possibly an atheist could adopt philsophical aspects of this religion, but then what then would stop them from adopting philosophical aspects of any religion? Taoism itself would not deny people of faith entrance into its system. Many Buddhists and Shintoists are also Taoists. Atheists who try to adopt this are just trying to make excuses for why they find meaning in life and are trying to get around the idea of faith. Taoism is not honestly compatible with atheism.
         Confucianism is a “system of social, political, ethical and religious thought based on the teachings of Confucius and his successors” (The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions, 1981, p. 189). Confucius was a scholar and philosopher, so adopting his ideas for an atheist may be okay. While Confucius was not an atheist and believed in spirits, not much of what he said was religious; yet after he died he was diefied by Chinese ancestral worshipers. Confucianism worship is based on ancestral worship and serving the spirits (which was one of Conufcius’s commands). Later in Chinese history “Emporer Han Ming Ti recognized Confucius as a patron of scholars and ordered that sacrifice should be offered to him. Sacrifice was carried out by the emporer himself, indicating the inclusion of Confucianism into official state religion” (The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions, 1981, p. 191). The Tang dynasty also built temples all around the country dedicated to Confucius. So, in this sense Confucianism is a religion that believes in spirits and ancestors as well as the worship of Confucius himself. So in this sense, Confucianism is not compatible with atheism, yet the teachings and ideas of Confucius himself before he died could be adopted by an atheist and still give the atheist credability as a follower of atheism. So in the sense of Confucianism’s philosophical aspects it is compatible with atheism, but religiously it would not.  
Eastern religion VS the West 
        Some atheists online make the claim that the West is screwed up because of Christianity and the East is much better because it is based on religions such as Shinto, the Buddha, Jain, Confucius, and the Tao. But if one looks at historical facts it is clear that the Christian West progressed very well and made many scientific discoveries and ideas that atheists hold important today like the scientific method and scientific laws. Many of the most famous scientists in history were Christians or believed in an idea of God (Galileo, Kepler, Kelvin, Newton, etc.).
        If one looks at the East and wants to claim it was more of a blessing to the world and is somehow superior, or perfect compared to the West then they need to re-examine historical facts such as Shinto being one of the main driving forces of the Japanese atrocities in World War 2. Another fact is the communist takeover of China in the Cultural Revolution thanks to Mao Ze Tung who murdered millions of his own people and rejected Confusianism. If Chinese based their culture on such “wonderful” religions why did Mao reject them? Same with Lennin and the communist revolution of Russia which led to Joseph Stalin murdering countless times as many people as Adolph Hitler. When thinking about Buddhism and Taoism one can remember that the Great Wall of China has countless corpses burried underneath it because of the Emporer of China used them as mortar. The East is full of many atrocities if not more than the West. Look at the extreme poverty of most Eastern countries that are based on eastern religious outlooks. Yet people still want to claim the West is corrupt and horrible, especially the United States because of Christianity. An atheist needs to think whether or not he wants to live in the USA or a place like India, North Korea, or China. Also, even if Japan is a very progressive country it has one of the highest suicide rates in the entire world thanks to the Shinto cultural aspects ingrained in the people.
         It is clearly ignorant to claim that eastern religions are atheistic and acceptable to the atheist as well as claiming eastern religions are superior to the western culture based on Judeo Christianity. One also needs to recognize that Christianity actually did originate in the East in a place called Israel. Also, the Islamic atrocities in the world can be attributed to the East. Internet atheists need to stop hijacking religions that have nothing to do with their humanistic, naturalistic worldview. It is a cheap tactic used to avoid the idea of faith and to allow them to avoid answering the illogical claims that there is meaning without faith. 
             (2002). Cambridge Illustrated History: Religions. Camrbidge 
                               University Press: Cambridge UK.
             (1989). The Encyclopedia of World Faiths. Facts on File: New York, NY.
             (1981) The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions. Harper Collins: New
                              York, NY.

15 thoughts on “Atheists Who Hijack Eastern Religions

  1. I skimmed over most of this just to read what you had to say about Buddhism and Taoism. I have to say, you completely butchered Buddhism there. There are actually three main branches of Buddhism: Theravada, Mahayana and Vajryana. Within these three are many, many “schools”. Almost all of them are theistic. There’s even one school called “Pure Land Buddhism” which is almost like Christianity except god is replaced with Buddha and heaven with the pure land. So you were correct about Buddhism for the most part. HOWEVER in the Mahayana branch there’s a school called “Zen Buddhism”. It rejects all supernatural aspects of Buddhism and interprets them more “rationally”. If you wish I can go into more detail about it.

    Then there’s Taoism. You were spot-on about religious Taoism. I didn’t like your explanation of Philosophical Taoism though. “Yin” and “Yang” have no supernatural aspects to them. Everything has its good points and bad points. You can’t have a sunny side of a hill without a shaded side. Likewise you can’t see something as “good” without something “bad” to compare it to. Therefore “good” and “bad” are subjective and one can’t exist without the other. That’s what Yin and Yang represent.

    Taoism, in its most basic sense, can be stated in one sentence: Shit happens. Stop trying to change the world to “what it should be” (That would be going against nature) and start accepting the world for what it is (Go with nature). That’s basically the entire Taoist philosophy right there. I hope I helped clear some things up a bit.

    • Hello ryan James Harasymchuck,

      Thanks for your feedback. I am sorry you did not like some of my explanations for some of the religions. I think you are getting me wrong, I was not trying to make an absolutely thorough explanation of every aspect of each religion, but simply trying to give the gist of it to prove that atheists who claim such religions are doing it out of ignorance and also making excuses for their longing for meaning that defies atheistic outlook.

      I never said yin and yang were supernatural. I did say that idea of yin and yang does not make sense if one is a believer in science and logic. Good and bad do not exist to atheists as morality is relative. Just saying they are subjective ideas is not a good enough reason to adopt taoism as an atheist.

      Also I do know about Pure Land Buddhism but I didnt feel like mentioning every detail. I got the main information from Cambridge History, Perannial Dictionary of World Religions and Encyclepedia of world faiths. I was not trying to make an end all of defenitions. Also can you explain how Zen Buddhism is rational and makes sense and is somehow compatible with atheism? I would like to know.

      And most people only know or mention the 2 main sects of buddhism, not all 3. even the dictionaries didnt mention the third one.

      Anyway thanks for your insight and if you have anything else to point out I encourage it. Have a nice day.

  2. Pathetically bad article. You seem to blame all if the easts faults on their religion when the reality is, it was due to imperialism and slavery conducted by the west. For an atheist, your logic and deductions is laughably bad. Eastern (with the exception of hinduism for its caste system) religions are much better than judeo christian religions. Anyone atheist who denies that is an idiot.

    • Hey look a drive by atheist!

      Imperialism did not start the communist takeover over of many countries that included murder of countless people. Atheist is actually responsible for that.
      But if their eastern religions are so precious to you atheists why is it that their countries have constantly been far from progressive? It took the western influence to allow Japan to progress. Are you going to actually claim Shintoism caused progression and western culture and Christians were damaging it?

      You are making extremely ignorant claims and looking silly.

      Eastern religions usually deny logic altogether. They don’t have problems with contradictions. Do you have a problem with contradictions? Is that scientific reasoning if you do?

      Please explain in detail how my logic and deductions are laughably bad. It seems all you are doing is using ad hominem attacks which don’t do anything to prove your claim.

      I think atheism is for idiots, so all together all atheists more often than not are idiots. The honest atheist would deny all religions and not single out christianity. You on the other hand are a typical american Atheist who only hates Christianity and have a personal agenda against the Bible it seems.

      Please explain how all the religions above can be honored by atheists or even used for atheists? How are they better than Christianity?

      • The main reason that most of us atheists attack Christianity (especially in america) is because that is our previous existence. I personally could care less about others so long as they are tolerant of me. But even if they were to offend me i would (and have [numerous times] ) shrug it off, and walk away (and never talk to them again). So, many recent converts will still have some bad views of others, but as time goes on they should become quite tolerant. I only chose to make my points to slow down this dangerous conflict.

        I think that the entire point of having a prefix religion to atheism is simply to have a greater form of order and structure to their life and a guide of things that they feel are important. I am a Daoist atheist, and I would like to point out again that this is simply the structure upon which to make your life. so like many contemporary Christians and even more so Jews either don`t practice or ignore the religious portions that i don’t want, so in doing this i form my own personal religion. I have many northern baptist (in relation to america) who don’t believe in hell something that could be argued as a fairly large disposition.

        I am a Taoist atheist not because i think it’s better than Christianity but because it more better suits my thoughts, philosophies, opinions, values and goals. I think that the areas where i find conformity to a side religion must outweigh the areas of divergence in order for me to consider it. When some one asks me what religion i practice i typically say “I don’t” or “I’m a Taoist” but rarely go into detail. They have to gain my trust for me to explain. Would have to agree with all that was mentioned of my (sort-of) religion, as the vast majority of what is mentioned in the “tao te ching” is a more formal, elaborate and specific of what they said (and more). I only thing that i feel that Christians and atheist alike (why i separate my self from both) lack that i find in great amounts is acceptance, In china people could care less how (or even what) you practice, but of course these are both massive stereotypes. Peace is important to me but my issue isn’t so much going to war but more of the events leading up to it.

        I think that besides the few minor errors (I’ve made most before), this was a good article, as he is simply expressing his opinion and arguing his point. I might not support it and might think that there were a few areas which were a bit excessive,(and i wouldn’t do anything to further conflict) but this is just how HE feels. The only other form of constructive criticism (only good comments) that i hope to offer (without being too harsh) to both sides of the argument is to be less stereotypical. A word to atheists I don’t know why anyone would post such negative (& lame) comments, the only comments that should be here are corrections or as mentioned before CONSTRUCTIVE criticism , i honestly (the writer probably the same) really don’t want to hear your opinions unless you can make the world (or this paper) a better place. This is like when you write an essay for English class, you expect people to help you make it better, not argue against you. in my opinion it is quite obvious that none of us truly know, and understand the religions that aren’t ours, even though the writer has apparently done some research, he cant understand any of these religions as he doesn’t live by them. Its like using a computer, it takes some effort to learn how to use it, but to truly utilize and understand it, it takes time and devotion.

        I would have to agree with Ehud that making opinions about culture based off past events is plain wrong. As far as i know, no place is perfect, and every (i think) flaw can also be considered as the positive opposite. For example, communism, I could get behind it, especially the way it is in china, so yeah its more of an opinion on which side has a better mindset, and i doesn’t matter as we live in the present and shouldn’t focus on the negative (opinion) things in history as the entire world has its flaws.

        I have no religion or (true) opinion,
        -The neutral prem (aka-Tate)

        ^^^worst closure ever but best i could come up with (and fit my identity)

  3. Incredibly fallacious and facetious article, with a side of blatant misinformation and contempt. You start off with an incorrect premise correlating Atheism with Naturalism, which have no connecting points whatsoever, and then you go on to relate the existence of a divine being with religious tenets such as karma, reincarnation and the concept of Yin and Yang, as if they all go on the same plate. Your inability to comprehend the differences between the aforementioned quite possibly stems from the Christian understanding of the supernatural as an offshoot from God, when in fact a good deal of the religions you discussed about have no creator deity, nor relate everything natural/supernatural to the god/s they believe in. For example, in traditional Buddhism, the gods are unimportant for achieving the ultimate goal and Buddha is certainly not an equivalent to the western idea of God. He is a spiritual teacher that has reached Nirvana. No more, no less, and certainly no god included in the package.

    Another major point you seem to be failing to grasp is that Atheism is a position on one question and one question alone – the existence of a god(s). Everything else is a completely irrelevant. An Atheist can believe in ghosts, spirits, souls, astral planes, karma, reincarnation, Yin and Yang, etc, as they are not necessarily tied to the existence of any god, therefore, your entire argumentation falls apart. Your condescending conversational skills also show your lack of maturity – you have absolutely no respect for your opponent and seem to be of the impression that Atheists are out on a crusade against a certain religion, when in fact most Atheists are normal people like you and me that are going by their day-to-day lives without any regard to any of the accusations you charged them with.

    Now, whether or not one religion is better than the other is debatable, but the hard cold facts are that Buddhism and wars is an oxymoron, something that cannot be said for Islam, for example. Same goes for the majority of Eastern religions, for the simple reason that have at the very least the common ground of peace, something foreign to a lot of Western religions. That’s just one instance where Eastern religions prevail over Western ones.

    Those are my two cents, you can take ’em or leave ’em, but you should know that intolerance won’t get you anywhere.

    • Show me some atheists who believe in a soul, ghosts, spirits, astral plains…

      Atheists usually believe only in things that they say have “hard evidence” such as things explained solely by science. This is where you are wrong about atheism and naturalism not having any connecting points. Almost every atheist is a naturalist. I think it is clear my article was addressing such.

      And in my experience, which is the reason I wrote this article, the majority of Atheists do attack Christianity out of any religion. This is a fact. You are just ignoring the obvious. Richard Dawkwins and Christopher Hitchens are champions for the atheist cause and almost everything they wrote was geared towards hate for Christianity.

      And to say Buddhists do not war is silly when history shows that Buddhists have come together and killed people and attacked people. In fact Shaolin Temple created Martial Arts for a reason to defend against people. Buddhists may think war is wrong, but sometimes even Buddhists must go to war. To say Western religion loves war is silly. Christianity does not love war and is not based on the idea of warring against people. But sometimes in history God’s people had to go to war. I think you should actually read the Bible and understand this fact and not assume the Bible commands war. If anyone is being intolerant it is you.
      Another interesting fact is that in Asia where many eastern religions come from there has been an intense history of war and many genocides far beyond anything the west has ever done. If Eastern religions prevent war then how do you explain the Khmer Rouge, Pacific War and World War 2, North Korea, Vietnam and more? Many atrocities happened and Eastern religion did not keep it from occurring. But the West influenced by Judeo-Christian morality entered into such conflicts to prevent an great evil as well as help the weak who were being oppressed. In fact World War 2 was started by evolutionist ideas (Nazi Germany – eugenics) and Eastern religion (Imperial Japanese – Shintoism and Emperor worship). Also, Hitler had a craving for Eastern occult religious ideas and believed the East had answers about the Aryan race. So this tells you something about how wonderful eastern religions are in preventing war and atrocities.

      You have blabbed on a lot but really have said nothing to prove me wrong. You may think you sound smart but you are nothing but a noisy gong and clanging symbol. Now show me atheists who believe in ghosts, spirits, astral plains, possibly a soul, and lower gods and explain exactly how Buddhism = atheism. And please if atheists are not all naturalistic then please explain the origin of the universe without naturalism.

  4. I find this article very disturbing, because it speaks with great authority, and so it is likely to influence many readers strongly, but that authority is not backed up by any deep understanding of the traditions of which it speaks.

    You have mistreated and misrepresented Buddhism especially badly.

    Buddhism as practiced in various cultures has acquired all kinds of gods, demi-gods, belief in the re-incarnation of the actual unique person after death and so on. Some of these are a result of importing Buddhism into an existing system of beliefs (much as Christianity co-opted pagan springtime and winter celebrations with their eggs, trees and yule logs to become Easter and Christmas). Some were added to BUddhist traditions over the centuries. None of these are part of the original insights into the nature of mind and existence or of the essential teachings.

    Pure Buddhism teaches a way to become aware of the true nature of our selves, and asserts that when achieved we experience a different form of consciousness and relate differently to the world. Unlike Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and most other religions (current and long dead) It has no need of Gods, and does not ask you to belief anything that you cannot test.

  5. … sorry about the spelling mistakes in the previous post – but there is no way to edit it.

    And one more point … Buddhism is entirely compatible with atheism. You do not have to believe in a god to be a Buddhist.

    It is true that many people that claim to be Buddhists believe that there are Gods or one God, and it is true that many worship the Buddha himself as a God. Those undeniable facts are either irrelevant to the pursuit of Buddhism, or are corruptions of the original teachings or unnecessary additions.

  6. have just noticed another absurd and unjustifiable statement. There are many, but this one especially annoyed me:

    “Good and bad do not exist to atheists as morality is relative”

    Most atheists have very clear ideas about what is good and bad . In any case religions like Islam and Christianity are very selective in which of their God’s directives they choose to obey. That means that they have a pre-existing sense of what is good and what is not, which allows them to disregard the evil things that their scriptures command them to do, and to focus instead on the good things. Fundamentalists must have a real problem when for just about every moral directive in the scriptures you can find an opposite and contradictory one.

    As for whether morality for non-believers is relative or not, that is still an unsettled philosophical question. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. To boldly assert that if you are an atheist then morality is relative strikes me as a disingenuous attempt to persuade your readers that faith in a superior power is required for moral behaviour. Nor does faith-based morality ensure harmonious human relationships when different faiths have different values, and even within a single faith there are conflicting moral imperatives.

  7. And finally, Science is not a religion. Science does not require you to take, on faith, assertions that are the absolute truth, for all time.

    True many people, misunderstand the scientific endeavour, and treat it as though it were a religious faith, but the true scientist knows that all scientific theories are tentative. The difference between religious faith and science is that when there is a mismatch between the prevailing theory and observed evidence , and the observations have been shown to be repeatable and reliable then the theory has to change or be abandoned and replaced. Our theories certainly embody some truth about how things are, but we do not expect them to encompass the whole truth, and if ever they did, we would have no way of ever knowing it. All scientific knowledge is provisional and is based on testable predictions of the theories we construct. Many people may choose to rely on what scientific “authorities” tell them, but ultimately science is not dependent on belief in the pronouncements of authorities like Popes and Ayatollahs. It is always testable.

    Religious faith is different. Mixed in with instructions on when people are to be killed, how god is to be worshipped, and how to treat your women, slaves and livestock, religious faiths tell of things that are inherently untestable, such as the existence of eternal souls and life after death. No conceivable observations or events would shake the faith of a true believer. Religious faith is entirely different from the scientific approach to understanding the world.

    • “Religious faith is different. Mixed in with instructions on when people are to be killed, how god is to be worshipped, and how to treat your women, slaves and livestock, religious faiths tell of things that are inherently untestable, such as the existence of eternal souls and life after death. No conceivable observations or events would shake the faith of a true believer. Religious faith is entirely different from the scientific approach to understanding the world.”

      Exactly why Buddhism is contradictory to atheism. End of discussion have a nice day and take your straw man’s about Faith elsewhere.

      • Er … I am sorry, all I see here is an ASSERTION that I have set up a straw man and an ASSERTION that it is the end of the discussion. I am very open minded, and will engage in reasonable debate with anyone, but I object to being dismissed in that way.

        I see no logical argument, no attempt at persuasion, and no facts in support of your position. Nor have you explained WHY a lack of belief in a god or gods is inimical to Buddhism (whereas a few posts back I argued that the essential teachings of Buddhism – not the strange systems that have grown out of it – does not require faith and has nothing to do with whether you believe in god or not. Atheists CAN be Buddhists.

        • Buddhism without faith in your works and reaching enlightenment (such a mystical and subjective term) is not Buddhism. The point is atheists deep inside understand without faith or spirituality there is not much meaning in life. Life cannot just be objective sight, smells, and other biological things. They try to fulfill their deep longing inside by hijacking eastern religions so they can still hate Christianity and mock it much like what you are doing. There is nothing scientific or proven in Buddhism. If you want some philosophical life style then just call it philosophy and stop trying to pretend you are a Buddhism. That is my opinion. The claim that somehow Eastern religions are greater than Christianity and are atheistic is a joke. They are simply just superstitions exactly what many atheists claim Christianity is.

          Your straw mans are the statements you made that Christian faith teaches immoral things and commands us to do things we simply ignore. That is bogus. This is why I dismissed you.

          And science CAN be a religion if you put your total faith and trust in science. For much people environmentalism is also a religion. In fact I believe liberalism is a religion, and in some way atheism is also a religion: the religion of non-religion.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s