On the Elephant and how to proceed.

You said:

That being said, I think this discussion will continue to be profitable in the fact that we can attempt to keep one another consistent in his own worldview and definitions. Plus, I am very interested in finding out a further explanation of your belief. I am interested because of your statement, “So acts that are distinct in having the intent of serving some kinda god are worship, and as such are part of religion.” Are you saying that you would not include Creationism or a Christian worldview as being religion then? The fact that I would see mathematics as a creation of God, governed by God and given meaning and purpose by God would not then be a religious view because it is not inclusive of religious devotion at these points. These are beliefs about existence and reality that are not necessarily inclusive of worship. One can hold them without worshipping the God who he believes does all of this. So is that then not religious? I would’ve thought you would include these things, but now I’m not sure so I’m just looking for further clarification.

I confess that I haven't thought about the distinction between religion and worship all that precisely, so that may explain some of the fuzziness of my answer.

Thinking about it some, I'm not sure you can draw all that precise a line sometimes. From my perspective, this is more or less just me 'supposing' than anything real. If I start trying to draw precise lines around definitions here, I start running into problems. How do you measure religion? How do you measure worship? How do you compare it against something else to see how it is like that something or different? How do you figure out what is worship vs. not worship? or Religion vs. not religion?

My vague, general notion is that Creationism is religious in that it is dependent on religion for its existence, but it is not in and of itself religion. Scientologists and Muslims and Christians are all creationists(at least I think so) but the religions tied to their disparate creation stories are different. I would say, generally, that creationism is an attribute of some religions, but it is not in and of itself religion. A christian worldview is similar. I don't think of it as religion, but I do think of it as religious in nature. I'd think that there are really high odds that a person that held a christian worldview was in fact a practioner of the christian religion.

Think of it like this. A worldview is a systematic set of beliefs. Religion is a specific type of acting out of those beliefs. It is one possible way of putting a worldview into practice. Does that make sense?

On whether or not we should continue? I think it could potentially be valuable. I suspect that we easily misunderstand each other sometimes. I use words in unfamiliar ways and mean different things than you do sometimes. And I'm not just talking about definitions. I'm also talking about underlying assumptions. For example, if you hear the term Secular Humanism, I'll bet you have a really different set of underlying assumptions about it than I do. Same with the word Atheism. There are other ready areas of misunderstanding. For example, it is a common mistake for a christian to assume that if someone doesn't believe in a god that they have no basis for being moral. From my perspective that couldn't be further from the truth. If we can do it in a non-confrontational way, it might be worthwhile to explore a non-theistic basis for morality, as another example of the type of topic I'm interesed in pursuing.

And that is just barely scratching the surface of possible topics that could enrich us both. I have a strong preference of using this as an educational opportunity for both of us rather than a debate or a fight, so to speak, and it has worked as that most excellently so far, in my opinion. We have no requirement to come to agreement. It is fine, at least in my opinon, for us both to use this as an opportunity to educate the other and help them come to a greater understanding.

Do well, friend.