Atheism, a dangerous idea?

I think we should limit the definition myself. If we do, the Soviet Union and China would be non-religious. Not sure about Ireland, however.

I am inclined to agree with that.

This is probably the first time that nwr has ever agreed with me about anything. But what I had in mind was the extreme worldliness of American culture--the money mentality--which I do not think is very religious.I was wondering if you were thinking of the same quality.

I`d settle for just what is defined as 'successful'.

I was using the definition of athiest civilization to mean the professed beliefs of the majority of the population within such a civilization. However, as Jar pointed out in chat, civilizations themselves, being largely political entities rather than individuals, can't be athiest, they can only be theocracies, have state sanctioned religions, or be secular. The term athiest civilization under this definition is a meaningless term. Upon reflection, I now agree the second definition is more appropriate. The USA is a secular nation as it is not a theocracy, nor does it have a state sanctioned religion.Edited by anglagard, : mixing nation with civilization

Maybe that's because you mostly post on nihilism, and I disagree with you about that. We probably agree on a lot, but there isn't much to debate when everybody agrees. I sometimes describe that by saying that the true American religion is worship of the almighty dollar.But, yes, that's one of the things suggesting unadmitted atheism.To most Americans, religiosity seems to be little more than a social convention. Attendance at church is no more important than attendance at the Kiwanis club or the Elks lodge.

I agree that there are many merely nominal Christians in America who live just like everybody else and show no signs at all of following Jesus. A wealthy nation offers every kind of temptation of course, starting with making money into an idol. But worldliness is a problem to Christians no matter what the actual circumstances, because it's a matter of the heart.I'm not too sure to what extent this reflects atheism exactly. The Stoics were atheists, weren't they? It's possible to be an atheist and live by a self-denying moral code.

In its basic sense, atheism is a-theism, or living ones life without theism. For all practical purposes, a nominal Christian is an atheist. Yes, sure, I agree.

I agree. It's really "practical atheism" though, even if they are theists in some philosophical sense.

Would you agree that the wealth of America is an additional temptation? It would be better, in a spiritual sense, if we were poor?

Yes, but it's hard to know. Poverty is maybe even more of a temptation to attachment to money than great wealth is. But on the other hand wealth is a lure to self-indulgences the poor can't even dream of. I just don't know how to weigh any of this. Doesn't matter where you are in the world there are always temptations away from the pure spiritual life.

The reason I say this is that I think that the American business culture is very corrupt. Of course, it may be in other countries also, but I cannot speak of other countries. I can give you an example if you like, but I suspect you know what I mean.

Not sure. Give me an example.

Hollywood accounting - Wikipedia

Either you are trying to change the subject, or I am just to stupid to follow you.Are you claiming if no civilization holds a particular worldview (or in this case, is missing a theological dimension), then the worldview, or lack of theological dimension is dangerous?Please elaborate?