> the challenges are things to which an atheist (metaphysical naturalist) would have to have a scientifically or mathematically plausible explanation in order to defeat the claim that atheism is a religion
Step one: define "religion." Accordign to dictionary.com:
A: Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
B: A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
Atheism is neither on of these, and not even close.
> you’ve cut my phrasings short
Of course I did. It's rude to cut and paste the whole thing back in. Anybody wants to read all of what you wrote, they can look up your post.
> For a metaphysical naturalist to assert his position is not a religion, he’d need to ...
...point out that that he does not have a belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
Since that cuts to the heart of your arguement, and cuts that heart out and stomps it flat, I'll leave it there.
VARIOUS DEFINITIONS OF THE WORD "RELIGION" (NONE ARE TOTALLY SATISFYING)
Problems with definitions:
The English word "religion" is derived from the Middle English "religioun" which came from the Old French "religion." It may have been originally derived from the Latin word "religo" which means "good faith," "ritual," and other similar meanings. Or it may have come from the Latin "religãre" which means "to tie fast."
Defining the word "religion" is fraught with difficulty. All of the definitions that we have encountered contain at least one deficiency:
Some exclude beliefs and practices that many people passionately defend as religious. For example, their definition might include belief in a personal deity or some supernatural entities. This excludes such non-theistic religions as Buddhism and religious Satanism which have no such belief.
Some definitions equate "religion" with "Christianity," and thus define two out of every three humans in the world as non-religious.
Some definitions are so broadly written that they include beliefs and areas of study that most people do not regard as religious. For example, David Edward's definition would seem to include cosmology and ecology within his definition of religion -- fields of investigation that most people regard to be a scientific studies and non-religious in nature.
Some define "religion" in terms of "the sacred" and/or "the spiritual," and thus necessitate the creation of two more definitions.
Sometimes, definitions of "religion" contain more than one deficiency.
Our compromise definition:
This website's essays use a very broad definition of religion: "Religion is any specific system of belief about deity, often involving rituals, a code of ethics, a philosophy of life, and a worldview." Thus we would consider Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Native American Spirituality, and Neopaganism to be religions. We also include Agnosticism, Atheism, Humanism, Ethical Culture etc. as religions, because they also contain a "belief about deity" -- their belief is that they do not know whether a deity exists, or they have no knowledge of God, or they sincerely believe that God does not exist.