Actually, if you got to a unitarian church you can oddly find outright atheists there sometimes. Not agnostics either, straight out atheists who just like the show.  I'm pretty sure some atheists actually have "Anti-chruches" too where they just hang out every sunday.

There are at least 2 books titles "The Atheist's Bible" as well.

I don't get why everything is always a play off christianity.  It's never Anti-Temple or Atheists Qu'ran.

Though, either way those are poor definitions of religion as many people who consider themselves catholic for example, don't go to church, perform any rights, fast or read the bible.

I don't know anyone that gives a portion of their income to anything, aside from throwing some money in a collection plate like you would a Jerry's Kids box.

Though I do agree atheism isn't a religion.

re·li·gion /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-lij-uhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience

(1) Does atheism require a set of beliefs?
-Yes. There is no guarantee that God or a set of gods does not exist. There is no solid evidence to that effect. As a result, one must believe that no god exists.

(2) Does believing in atheism include a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe?
-Absolutely. Atheists typically believe that the cause of the universe is an accident, that nature of the universe is to continue following a natural state of being, a natural course of events, and that "survival of the fittest" is typically dominate, despite whether or not said atheists believe in evolution. And atheists believe that there is no purpose of the universe.

(3) Does atheism have a set of beliefs or practices generally agreed upon by a group?
-Of course. Nothing quite as organized as the typical God-fearing religion, but atheists still believe that morality is up to the individual, that logic and science reign, rather than a deity, et cetera. Sounds an awful lot like a set of beliefs, like practicing the act of gaining knowledge.

(4) Do atheists follow their belief set with a degree of devotion?
-There's no way anybody could deny this. Of course.

(5) Does atheism require faith?
-Yes. Frankly, there is no solid evidence to say that God doesn't exist. There is no proof that the universe is natural. As a result, it requires a degree of faith to be certain that there is no God. Just like you have to have faith that your car isn't going to overheat and catch fire when you drive it, or that you have to have faith when you go to the bank that nobody will rob it and shoot you, you also have to have faith that you know God doesn't exist.

And, actually, I could make a wonderful argument that it requires more faith to not believe in God. But, that's not the point.

The point is... you're fooling yourself if you say you don't follow some sort of religion. By definition, atheism most definitely fits under the category of religious belief. Religion is a part of everybody, just like your taste in music, what sorts of food you like, or the type of career you prefer. Everybody follows a religious belief, although you certainly can say that some follow their belief more... religiously... than others.

here is the most important thing you will ever hear in relation to conspiracy.....


if you have heard about it weither you think it was false or not it no longer/never did exist......

if one of thee things were ever to be true you would not know about it till the coup was over or we were enslaved by an alien race that was breading lochnessian monsters to take ver the world (and if you believe that i have some lovel land on the moon for sale)

 I actually have several friends who go to unitarian church, and at least one of them considers themselves an atheist. While I never really saw the point of going to church as an atheist, apparently Unitarian Universalists embrace anyone on a quest for general spirituality - even if they don't believe in God.

But then, everyone from Communists to rationalists/naturalists to Buddhists could be considered "atheist." Atheism is not a belief system, but a property of a belief system.

Also, I doubt the "Atheist's Bible" is anything more than an ironic title. :)

 A book with an ironic title that helps people in their non-belief of a god through the statements inside.

Just being a smart ass though. 

Josephus's account of Jesus was one hundred years after his death. I believe you are refering to the Antiquities of the Jews. there are no accounts of Jesus in the Talmuds(the history of the Jews). This by no means disproves that a man named Jesus existed it could be the striken him from the books or that they never included him out of fear to acknowledge his existence.

The are several Yeshu's and Yeshua's(jesus's actual name) that pop up in the Talmuds though. Very few had apostles though. There was a guy named Yeshu(who was a student of Yeshua Ben Prada) who had five apostles with names like  Mattai and Luqua, I can't remember their Aramaic names. But Mattai is Matthew and Luqua is Luke. Yeshu was put to death for burning meat in public but he had freinds in the goverment so they sent someone out to announce his death and ask anyone to come forward in his defense for 30days no one did and he was hanged. Not a carbon copy of the New Testement by far.

 This was a Messanic age and there was no prinitng press there were plenty of people claiming ot the messiah and yes there is a link to astrological roots. It is entirely possible that Jesus did not exist as was written and instead a conglomerate of stories that got mixed from by orally passing accounts of Messiah X and Y with similiar names(Yeshu, Yeshua). Me I tend to believe Jesus existed however I do not delude myselof into thinking there is absolute proof that he did.

Christianity itself mixed many popular religions of the day. Mithras, Cult of Osirus, Zorastrism are the main ones. Mithras broke bread and drank wine every sunday on their day of rest. Zorastrism had many of the aspects of hell and afterlife and good and evil(except an uknown outcome). Christianity also fleshed out an old jewish practice of the Mikvah(we call it baptism). There is nothing wrong with christianity mixing beliefs IMO because that would be the intention.

1) Being an atheist does not require a set of beliefs. You can be a "strong atheist" (God does not exist, and that's that), or you can be a "weak atheist" (God does not exist unless His existence is proven to me.) While you could make an argument that strong atheism is a belief in something, weak atheism (the view that most reasonable atheists hold) is nothing more than applying one's general logical faculties to the existence of God. For example, I could say that there's no proof that there's not a giant invisible walrus sitting behind you, but stating that you believe that there's not unless proven otherwise doesn't mean that you subscribe to the religion of awalrusism. It means you're a reasonable person.

2) You're confusing atheism with... well... what natural science teaches us. Though many atheists hold a naturalistic worldview, others are Buddhists or Taoists or animists. All "atheism" tells us about a person is that they don't believe in any god or gods - that's all.

3) See (2).

4) You twisted the words of the definition, which states that followers of a religion must hold to "devotional and ritual observances." There are no devotional or ritual observances that atheists, as a whole, follow.

5) This one requires a long explanation. Basically, what you're describing isn't faith; it's the faculties of common sense that natural selection endowed us with. If we had to constantly worry about every remote possibility of danger while doing something, we would never be able to function. Just so, if we had to consider every remote possibility in the search for truth, no matter the amount of proof (or lack thereof) for it, we would never find what we were looking for.

For elaboration, see my walrus example above; do you believe that there is a walrus behind you? How about a giraffe? A fox? Any other specific animal out of the thousands that exist? How about any other fictitious animal that you can think of? Inanimate objects? How do you know that there will be a floor there? How do you know that there will be a floor underneath you a second after reading this sentence? Two? Three? I could go on and on with the questions you could ask if you did not factor proof into the equation. If you had to consider every single one of these possibilities before deciding what you believe or how you act, then you would never come to any conclusion on anything.

To solve this problem, natural selection has endowed us with the faculty of skepticism, which allows us to sift the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Because gullibility is not a desirable evolutionary trait - no animal wants to be an easy target for tricky predators, after all - skepticism developed to make us cautious, to ask questions, and to deny something for which there is no proof. Most of the time, therefore, when someone says, "there is an invisible walrus behind you" or some other such claim, you ask them for proof, and if they don't pony up, you don't believe them.

Atheists simply take that one tiny step further: when someone says, "God exists," we ask them for proof, and when they inevitably don't provide, we don't believe them. It's not faith; it's an application of our natural inclination toward common-sense conclusions based upon hard evidence.

Do you understand what I'm getting at? 

Garcian Smith about the Atheist Bible. Many people who are not relgious do in fact study the bible they have a different insight and wether people like it or not there si a history in the bible even if you are atheist. Once again because most of the stories were orally passed down like the first five books it would not be what was written perse but neither is troy yet Troy is also a true story. So there are atheist archaelogists and historians and intellectuals who do look at the bible and try to see past the words that are written and tell what really happened. So the fact an atheist bible exist does not shock me.

I'll agree - there are a large variety of atheist religions.

But, like I said before - it doesn't matter. There are a large variety of theist religions as well, from all parts of the spectrum, but that doesn't change how diverse they are, or how much any of them are a belief set - a religion. There are a billion people out there that claim Christianity, but they don't go to church, they don't pray, they don't read the Bible, etc. Hardly a practicing Christian, but they still have some sort of religious belief, a religious stance.

Just because an atheist doesn't practice traditional religious practices doesn't mean they aren't following some sort of religion.

Haven't seen zeitgeist yet but I can answer this question very easily. Constatine actually made the decree that Jesus was born on Dec 25th in order to help move people to christianity. Dec 25th is the winter solistice or more importantly 3 days after the winter solstice. it goes some thine like Life Death rebirth or something but yes it is very easy to calculate the date of at least one god since the emperor of Rome declared it.