To really hate it when atheists take the piss out of those who believe in God?

[sharkirasharkira]

I have several FB friends who are obvious atheists, and often share things about science and/or about the concept of God being stupid -basically saying that anyone who believes in God is an idiot, a child (with an 'imaginary friend') or someone who has no idea about science and the universe.

I get that not everyone has faith in a higher being/religion etc but why the childish name calling and the necessity to take the piss out of those who do? It just really irritates me! Belief in God and an appriciation of science are not mutually exclusive. I find it quite offensive that people who don't know my personal beliefs are essentially saying that if I believe in God I must be an idiot or a child who believes in magical sky fairies, because theres no possible way I can believe in evolution (for example) and be an agnostic.

Aibu to think that people should just let others believe what they want to believe without mocking them for it, even if they don't agree with it?

I should be working really but I can't resist sharing Noah Yuval Harari's take on this, as it is v interesting.

Harari traces our belief systems back 15,000 years to the first evidence we have found of a belief in a deity. (The first Briton was recently dated at 10,000 old, so basically we have believed in deities ever since we had complex language and could imagine something on the other side of the hill).

We started off as hunter-gatherers. We were at risk from the elements and the animals and plants we needed to survive, so we venerated them. We were animists.

Then the first agricultural revolution began. We domesticated animals. We needed to be at the top of the tree vis a vis other species. We were still intensely vulnerable to the elements etc, so we developed polytheism, but lots of the gods were now in our own image.

Eventually (over thousands of years), each of the main religions switched to monotheism, as the areas over which people exerted control grew larger, and more in need of effective mechanisms of state control. A monotheist religion in the image of man was a good solution, for all sorts of reasons.

There are plenty of other "inner" reasons to do with our need to build narratives and to have faiths that help explain the evolution of organised religion, but Harari's story, which he explains in his book "Sapiens" is really well set out and worth a read.

Where it gets disturbing is in his sequel - Homo Deus - where he looks for the "gods" of the future. There is no reason to assume that we will not have "gods" in the sense of universal belief systems and ideologies in the future. Indeed there are lots of positive reasons to be grateful for the organising principles of the great organised religions, however flawed.

Harari expects the gods of the future to come from silicon valley (stay with me!) Health systems, instead of being used to make us better, are already evolving so that those who can afford it can "improve" themselves. This is the future he sees - people with seriously enhanced cognitive capacities, paying for a physical and mental upgrade every so many years, while the rest of us are, well frankly, inferior.

The impetus behind state health systems in the early 20th C was not mainly "benevolent", in the sense that we "ought" to make people better just because it is the "right" thing to do, since we are (say the Christians and the humanists) at the top of the tree and all entitled to dignity by virtue of being human. Instead, it was utilitarian - e.g. we need healthier people to fight in WW1, build bigger soviet factories, whatever.

Sooner or later we will reach a point when there is no "utilitarian" need for a lot of people. We need embedded "religious" belief systems (whether humanist or theist) as a bulwark to protect ourselves from pure "science" when we reach this point.

I don't get the whole 'you wouldn't say that to a Muslim' defence.

What is that supposed to imply exactly? That people only attack Christianity because it is an easy target? Or that it's somehow a 'good' thing that Muslims are more likely to offer physical violence to people who criticise their religion?

Have you considered it might be mainly because we live in a country where Christianity is the state religion, and therefore the one most people are likely to encounter in their lives?

Also, I'm pretty sure that most atheists are happy to criticise Islam, Hinduism and all other religions whenever they encounter them, certainly in online discussions I've never seen anybody shy away.

Personally, I treat all religions equally, which is certainly something that religious people can't say.

Your analogy would be more apt if you said people still watch the BBC, because that is voluntary. it's only in this country where owning a tv has any connection to the bbc.

I did also mention still watching the BBC in my pervious post.

I am not sure who said that, but clearly you can be brilliant and religious at the same time. But, that doesn't mean such people are rational about their religious belief. In fact, most honest people will label it as such - they'll call it faith, which is irrational.

'The thing is, rational people are not actually stopping the stupid from believing in their preferred brand of bullshit, or having whatever conversations with their imaginary friend they choose.'
This is what I was referring too.

But the religious people I know largely go about their business quietly.

every time you apply to a faith school that's state funded, you are not quietly going about your business. that's 1/3 of schools.

I think many people forget that there are a vast number of atheists who are racist, sexist and bigots. You don't need a religion to be a twat

of course you can be an atheist and a racist or sexist. The difference, however, is that atheism itself doesn't push you in that direction. But religion will do that.

I've also noticed that all the sarcastic comments about 'sky fairies' seem to be aimed at Christians on here. Suspect these posters wouldn't dare to make the same comment to a Silk or Muslim's face as they know exactly how bad they'd sound.

What's a silk? Do you mean silk as in a Queens Counsel Barrister or do you mean a Sikh?

Actually all 3 Abrahamic religions worship the same god. So when you rip the piss out of a sky god for christians you are also mocking Islam & Judaism as it's their god too.

But the religious people I know largely go about their business quietly. Wish I could say the same for the performance atheists of social media.

I am an atheist and there is NOTHING on any of my social media to suggest it nor do I raise it in real life.

My religious friends however never shut the fuck up about God. The Christians and Muslims being the worst offenders. Prayers and memes and endless fucking God God God.

Dont hear much from any others and I know many of my friends are Hindus/Sikh/Jewish.

Precisely Niki.

I never ever post about atheism and nor do my atheist friends.

However the Christians I know manage to shoehorn god into most of their posts.

I don't get the whole 'you wouldn't say that to a Muslim' defence.What is that supposed to imply exactly? That people only attack Christianity because it is an easy target? Or that it's somehow a 'good' thing that Muslims are more likely to offer physical violence to people who criticise their religion?

Exactly.

I'll go there then.

Islam = god speaks to an illiterate war lord in Arabia and he is somehow able to write it all down and it contains all of the answers to humanity's problems?!

As we can see it hasnt. Load of crap.

ill happily have a bash at any religion-theyre all silly. i must compliment Mormonism on taking christianity and making it even sillier though. scientology takes the piss even more

most posters on here will have grown up in a country that is dominated by christianity- they have had the most exposure, the most teaching about and the largest suffering of christianity- it natural its the main one targeted.

the difference is that atheism itself doesn’t push you in that direction

What about when atheists just decide to be twattish about people who have faith, just for that sake of it? And let’s face it there are plenty of posters on here happily bragging (or pretending) that’s what they do. That is them using their atheism as an excuse to be a twat.

As I said right at the beginning of the thread it’s just another form of intolerance.

What about when atheists just decide to be twattish about people who have faith, just for that sake of it? And let’s face it there are plenty of posters on here happily bragging (or pretending) that’s what they do. That is them using their atheism as an excuse to be a twat.

Atheists can be rude, of course. But there is nothing about atheism that says be rude. It's not a virtue in atheism. It's just people being rude. We don't have a holy book in which it says be rude to theists. In fact, the only thing that binds us is non-belief in god. that's it. It's compatible with atheism to be astrologers, believe in leprachauns, and be mass murders.

But when a christian or muslim tells you you suck because you are gay, that's not only them being rude, but the religion is telling them to think that.

What about when atheists just decide to be twattish about people who have faith, just for that sake of it? And let’s face it there are plenty of posters on here happily bragging (or pretending) that’s what they do. That is them using their atheism as an excuse to be a twat.

I'll be rude about anyone who thinks non believers are infidels and kafir.

Aaah but NewYearNiki do you just assume they believe those things because you think you know their personal beliefs? Or do you bother to check? Do you have any idea for example how many different branches of Christianity there are for example? They can vary wildly in their attitudes and values. Too many atheists make assumptions when someone says they have a faith. It’s like believing all Muslims support Isis.

I dont care.

I believe all religions are wrong in the sense that they prioritise blind faith over reason.

Do you have any idea for example how many different branches of Christianity there are for example?

Why are some people so condescending about atheists’ knowledge about religion, its structures and what different people may or may not believe? That because we don’t believe in it, we must all be ignorant of it?

Too many theists make assumptions when someone talks about being an atheist, and their interactions with people of faith.

Sort of like believing Muslims all support ISIS.

Again with the whataboutery! There are issues regarding all the world’s major religions to do with things like women’s rights and how you see people who don’t believe the same as you. If you practice a religion it’s up to you to take a good look at all it does and weigh it up for yourself.

The fact there are so many branches of Christianity is another clue that it’s all bollocks. They can’t even agree on what their own God’s book means 🙄

Aaah but NewYearNiki do you just assume they believe those things because you think you know their personal beliefs? Or do you bother to check? Do you have any idea for example how many different branches of Christianity there are for example? They can vary wildly in their attitudes and values. Too many atheists make assumptions when someone says they have a faith. It’s like believing all Muslims support Isis.

I think it's reasonable to make some assumptions based on the published works. If we had to ascertain the exact beliefs of every single deist in the room before we could start a discussion about religion we'd never be able to start. Most Christians I've actually tried to have a discussion about it are pretty vague about what they believe themselves come to that. They have "faith", they don't need to decide what exactly they have faith in they just need to pray and be nice to people.

It's one reason it's difficult to explain atheism. I've yet to find a logically internally consistent version of religion I could believe if I tried. But if you point out the flaws in one version, there are three more Christians in the queue saying I don't believe that. I think what I need is an atheism/theism discussion flow diagram.

Black, one of my first steps out of Christianity was learning about the work of Luther on the Protestant Bible.

the religious people I know largely go about their business quietly

I should say they dont want to shout about the christian privilege they enjoy, in case to many people notice and try to remove it.

*I have plenty of critical thinking capacity. I have a physics degree.
*
Then why are you choosing not to critically examine the claim you made earlier in the thread about God & his "sacrifice" to the world?

You apparently cannot see that one being, dividing himself into three so that one third can "sacrifice" himself to another is inherently ridiculous.

And what exactly was the "sacrifice"? His life? Since he's apparently living up in Heaven with himself/his Dad, then he has "sacrificed" a few uncomfortable hours at best. And it didn't even work, anyway, since people are still going to go to "hell" if they "sin" so his senseless showboating achieved precisely nothing - which he would have known if he'd switched on his omniscience that day.

Declaring yourself a critical thinking scientific type does not give your illogical pronouncements credibility, I'm afraid. Nonsense is nonsense.

Well I would drive you mad catkind I’m one of those Christians who believes in J.C. but doesn’t go along with everything the church says (in fact I rarely go to church). I wouldn’t say I’m vague though, I do know what I do and don’t believe.

Christian: "Atheists believe the universe came out of nothing...that everything is just one happy accident. How stupid is that?"
Atheist: "Well. actually, let me show you this peer reviewed research/paper/book....

Atheist: "Christians believe a dead Palestinian preacher who is also his own father listens to their inner thoughts and considers changing future events if they ask him to"
Christian: "How dare you mock my private, personal beliefs?

MissyB1

So what do you believe? It's been surprisingly hard getting anyone to commit to specifics...

Anyone got any opinions on the Alan Watts videos? Or Alan Watts himself for that matter.

So what do you believe? It's been surprisingly hard getting anyone to commit to specifics...

I am not a physicist, but apparently something came from nothing at a certain time (or something to that affect) and the universe has been expanding ever since.

But, I don't have a lot invested in that answer. I think the correct answer is that that is the best explanation we currently have, and be prepared for many revisions as information comes in. So my certainty on how the universe started is basically zero.