• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Atheist Mega Churches ----- WTF?

Seriously?
Only the meetings are structured - that is to enable the human beings involved in organising them to put them together. Organisation is easier with some structure. Council meetings have structure, cookery club meetings have structure, reading clubs have structure ... would you conflate those with religion, in order to just dismiss them in a similar way?
 
Seriously?
Only the meetings are structured - that is to enable the human beings involved in organising them to put them together. Organisation is easier with some structure. Council meetings have structure, cookery club meetings have structure, reading clubs have structure ... would you conflate those with religion, in order to just dismiss them in a similar way?
Well, no, but the structure of, say, my poetry group doesn't come with Q and A sessions, the ubiquitous social gathering afterwards, singing and preaching. We just sit down and someone puts the readers in some sort of order. In other words our structure is only based on necessity. Yours seem to come with embellishments that seem unnecessary to me, or that I wouldn't particularly enjoy (especially the singing part. I just don't get it.)
 
The concept doesn't make any sense. "We all lack belief in deities" is not much of a unifying trait: I've met plenty of atheists with whom I had almost nothing in common, both in terms of interests and ideology, besides not believing in god(s).

In order for a so-called atheist group to have any reason for being, you need to add additional traits... but I can't think of any such traits that would apply only to atheists, or to all atheists.

For instance, if those traits are "an interest in science and critical thinking" or "a desire to protect the separation of church and state", I can think of plenty of atheists who don't actually share them (technically, Raëllians and some types of Buddhists are atheists, not to mention those who don't believe in deities but believe in ghosts/homeopathy/etc.), just like I can think of many theists who do share them (despite their one skeptical blind spot ;) ).

I'd find it pretty silly if someone started a group where you must, for instance, support the separation of church and state AND be an atheist, rather than letting moderate/liberal theists who support the cause join in.

And that's not even getting into the use of religious terminology for no apparent reason. Seems like the only purpose of this is to give ammunition to the "atheism is just another religion" douchetrolls.
 
As I stated above (unless you are not referring to the Sunday Assembly), I have said already that we do NOT all lack a belief in deities, nor do we encourage a gathering of only atheists. It's for everyone. The one unifying trait is a feeling that some kind of community get together, not based on religion or any other 'unifying trait', would be nice.
 
I was commenting specifically on the concept of "atheist churches" from the O.P. (I should have made that clearer).
 
I was commenting specifically on the concept of "atheist churches" from the O.P. (I should have made that clearer).

Well, the problem is that the term "atheist church" is what the press is using to describe the Sunday Assembly, because they feel it sums up what is happening (however inaccurately). They've chosen to call themselves The Sunday Assembly, which is fair enough, but that's apparently not descriptive enough. Is there a better form of words that describes what The Sunday Assembly is about, that is snappy enough to be used instead of "atheist church"?
 
Then I should have read further than the o.p. before posting ;)
Though I'm glad to hear that the whole concept is more misrepresentation than reality.
 
While literally accurate, it doesn't really flow off the tongue.
Au contraire. I think it parses quite nicely.
Sounds almost like an affliction or malady.
You're starting to sound like a bleever....!
Perhaps atheist atrium to describe a dedicated building and atheist communitas for the gathering itself.
Urk, and you found my suggestion incommodious!
 
Here is the FAQ section from the North Texas Church of Freethought web site:

http://www.churchoffreethought.org/faq.php

The services at NTCOF that I attended years ago were generally entertaining and informative. We even sang a little bit. I remember the "Pastor" had written a song in praise of reason to the tune of "Waltzing Matilda."

But the undercurrent seemed to be that the atheism of a Sam Harris or Christopher Hitchens is outdated and bringing arguments to bear against supernaturalism unimportant. And as I said before, they were too quick in the consideration of faith-language ("spirit, soul, god") and this caused me to think that NTCOF may be too soft in its secularism. I haven't been to a service or read up on their views in a long while, so maybe they've changed.

Also, I just remembered. The heads of NTCOF as well as many of its members are decidedly right-wing politically. It is, after all, located in Texas.

BTW, Randi and Penn and Teller seem to be friends of NTCOF.
 
100% not my thing. I honestly can't see what people get out of it.

But, then, I can't see what people get out of throwing a frisbee, eating Marmite or watching Westerns, either. There's no harm in it, so as far as I'm concerned people can do what they like. It'd be a boring world if we all liked the same things.

I wouldn't mind some of the talks, maybe, if they're interesting (and isn't that what YouTube is for? In fact, cut out the talking and give me a well-written article), but the rest of it? No thanks. I honestly think I'd find it torturous.
 
You know, this whole idea of people who aren't religious, but just want to sit in church and hear a sermon, reminds me of a Mitch Hedberg quote: "I love Blackjack. But I'm not addicted to gambling, I'm addicted to sitting in a semicircle." :p
 
That's something I don't get about an atheist counterpart to churches. I can't picture what they would actually DO there. I've gone to a Lutheran church, so I know what happens there: people listen to a preacher preaching. If there's no preacher preaching, there's nothing for everybody else to focus on. Other kinds of clubs I'm familiar with are based on activities, so when you go there, the club's defining activity is what you do; so what would, for example, a cooking club be without any cooking?
Well, what's the difference between a sermon and a lecture? The subject matter, right?
 
From what I have seen American atheists have a terrible time with those who are religious. When Americans "come out" they are threatened, other members of their family don't talk to them anymore, it's terrible the way they are treated for not wanting to believe in the god delusion.

I think it's a great idea & obviously gives those who do not want to believe in this or that god a place to meet with people who will support them when others turn their back on them.

I wonder if the atheist churches will be as hungry for money as religious churches?

people who say this are generally exaggerating or have social issues that they tend to completely ignore that cause their issues with believers they know.

In the two most extreme issues I've seen where people flipped out on being "outed" I saw a scam artist in her 50s who had no sense or responsibility or organization suggesting that she was kicked out of a college program for coming "out" Total BS

Then I saw a father denigrating his wife for "brainwashing her kid" and "abusing him" for sharing her beliefs with him. When he shared the note his mother actually sent him after he flipped out on his entire family because they were surprised that he didn't want to go to church with them, the letter was confused but loving and supportive.

Foreigners tend to pick up this freaky extreme West Boro Baptist versions of believers. Yes some believers are big on trying to convert people but in general most "believers" in this country are unto themselves and their own business and lives. They aren't running all over the place bashing atheists.

:rolleyes:
 
people who say this are generally exaggerating or have social issues that they tend to completely ignore that cause their issues with believers they know.

In the two most extreme issues I've seen where people flipped out on being "outed" I saw a scam artist in her 50s who had no sense or responsibility or organization suggesting that she was kicked out of a college program for coming "out" Total BS

Then I saw a father denigrating his wife for "brainwashing her kid" and "abusing him" for sharing her beliefs with him. When he shared the note his mother actually sent him after he flipped out on his entire family because they were surprised that he didn't want to go to church with them, the letter was confused but loving and supportive.

Foreigners tend to pick up this freaky extreme West Boro Baptist versions of believers. Yes some believers are big on trying to convert people but in general most "believers" in this country are unto themselves and their own business and lives. They aren't running all over the place bashing atheists.

:rolleyes:

Yep, my sisters became quite devote some years ago taking the majority of my nephews with them. Their belief and/or my lack of it is never an issue that comes up for discussion. It is their thing and I must say that it has provided (through ministry work) some of my nephews with opportunities and exposure they might not have had otherwise. So I ain't gonna knock it with them. Work, friends, relations heck someone you meet on the street (and these days online), community has never been an issue for me. Though I can and do understand why some may what their experience in that regard to be more structured.
 
"I don't believe in god"
"Me neither"
"Awesome!"
"Sooooooo..........now what?"


People listen to a preacher because they are allegedly using a source of discussion the congregation universally deems 100% true and perfect. The Bible.

There is no atheist equivalent. Unless the person starts solving equations or something. Then it becomes a snooze fest.
 
Over the last weekend, I introduced a lecture theatre full of people to no less than 23 speakers over two days.

What's the difference between a preacher in a church, and a speaker in a lecture theatre? Only the subject matter.

Like I said, I haven't been to the local one, but I imagine that they would have speakers like those we presented at the Convention, speaking on subjects similar to what we heard at the Convention. Also, songs. What, exactly, is wrong with that?
 
Like I said, I haven't been to the local one, but I imagine that they would have speakers like those we presented at the Convention, speaking on subjects similar to what we heard at the Convention. Also, songs. What, exactly, is wrong with that?

It does seem an odd disconnect between the speakers and the songs. If you want a society where people go and listen to lectures, sure, although there's probably already one nearby. If you want a society where people gather together to sing, then sure, although I'm sure there's more than one choir locally. But why structure either in a way that apes a church service? I don't get it.

But, as I said above, I don't think there's any thing wrong with it. I wouldn't think there's anything wrong with people gathering together to blow up balloons while unicycling. It just seems like a strange thing to do.
 
Why do atheists try to present themselves as these laid back mind yer own business types who are hounded by believers. I've seen far more attacks on believers for espousing their views than I've ever seen on atheists.

It's tosh, the idea that atheists shrug their shoulders and get on with it is ridiculous. Just see what is the busiest forum on this site. It's the religious thread, filled with, you guessed it, atheists.... LOL
 

Back
Top Bottom