How to reply to 14 crazy things religious believers say

Since it's July 4, Independence Day, here in the United States, I thought I'd mark the occasion by composing 14 replies to some crazy stuff religious believers might say. This is in line with my commitment to spiritual independence. And also because, as I said in a post on my HinesSight blog, I'm not feeling good about our political independence these days.

Enjoy...

If someone says, God must exist eternally, because the cosmos couldn't create itself, reply: If nothing created an eternal God, then nothing could have created an eternal cosmos, the difference being that the cosmos clearly is real, and there's no demonstrable evidence of God.

If someone says, Consciousness is immaterial, unrelated to the physical brain, reply: Then if I hit you over the head with this baseball bat, really hard, you'll still be normally conscious. I'm ready to try this experiment after you sign a form releasing me of all liability. Are you up for this?

If someone says, I have complete faith in life after death being better than this life, reply: Then why haven't you committed suicide yet?

If someone says, Atheists are immoral because only God and His messengers know the difference between right and wrong, reply: I double-dare you to tell this to the Dalai Lama, face-to-face, since Buddhism doesn't believe in God.

If someone says, I've had a personal experience of God, reply: And I've had a personal experience of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy, so I win, 3 to 1!

If someone says, God has given humans dominion over all creatures great and small, reply: Excellent! Don't you have a dog and cat? I've been having a craving for a canine/feline stew, so crate them up and I won't have to shop for dinner.

If someone says, Anyone who rejects God is doomed to hell, reply: I'm sorry to hear of your impending horrific afterlife. Since there are thousands of different gods, you've rejected all but your single chosen god, so all those other gods are going to be super-pissed at you.

If someone says, My guru is God in Human Form and he deserves my selfless service, reply: What a coincidence! I'm also God in Human Form and have a lot of household chores that need doing. Here's my address. Look forward to seeing you soon. 

If someone says, God is real because I feel blissful when I think of Him, reply: It sounds just like how I feel whenever I think of Trump being convicted of a conspiracy to defraud Congress by plotting the January 6 insurrection, and thereby prevented from ever holding public office again.

If someone says, Words are powerless to describe the Almighty Lord, reply: Then why don't you shut the fuck up.

If someone says, Science is a pitifully poor way to know reality compared to mystical wisdom, reply: I look forward to getting your smartphone, computer, car, television, microwave, and all the other devices you own that are founded on modern science, since you're so dismissive of scientific knowledge. 

If someone says, Atheism is a belief system just as much as religions are, reply: Guess you also consider that people who have no interest in golf are believers in not-playing-golf, even though they never think about golf except when someone asks why they don't play that game. 

If someone says, There are no atheists in foxholes, reply: How do you know? Can you speak the language of foxes?

If someone says, Near-death experiences prove there's life after death, reply: Do you understand the difference between "near-death" and "death"?

Comments

[Appreciative Reader]

Good ones.

I realize this is just light-hearted stuff, but still, my favorites, and/or those that made me think:

(1) If someone says, I have complete faith in life after death being better than this life, reply: Then why haven't you committed suicide yet?

..........Some weirdos do that, actually! Those are outliers, though, even in the weirdo universe of theistic believers, so that's a good thing. But still.

(2) Anyone who rejects God is doomed to hell, reply: I'm sorry to hear of your impending horrific afterlife. Since there are thousands of different gods, you've rejected all but your single chosen god

..........Good one. Not a new one, obviously, but a great answer, and actually a deep answer for such theists as have not actually thought about this answer seriously.

(3) If someone says, Words are powerless to describe the Almighty Lord, reply: Then why don't you shut the fuck up.

..........Why don't they, indeed!

(4) If someone says, Atheism is a belief system just as much as religions are ...

..........That's one piece of silliness that one often comes across. I'm not sure the quick onliner of yours really deals with this. Probably a long-winded explanation about how that's a fallacious observation is the only way to go. On the other hand, the inveterate theist will only ignore what you've said, or word-salad their way to obfuscating their way out of the issue, and go back to doing their thing, so I'm not sure either approach actually works IRL. Still, maybe there's 1 in dozen theists that might, eventually, be able to respond to reason, and realize the utter irrationality of their beliefs.

[Felipe]

And if some writes endless blogs about how God does not exist, then recommend reading about projection

[Appreciative Reader]

How on earth does any of that amount to "projection", Felipe? Care to explain?

As for the "endless blog (posts)", I think Brian's doing a great job of it, both in terms of sussing things out for himself, as well as providing a truly invaluable resource for people to refer to and engage with.

But again, and regardless of whether you appreciate his blog or not, I'm curious how on earth you equate what he's doing with what psychology refers to as projection. Do please explain.

[um]

@ AR

As words like "projection" get an different connotation outside the study of an psychologist, I prefer to leave it for what it is.

That said its for sure that many if not all things people do are and "means to an end" and that end needs not to be related to the means at all.

So there can be many reasons for reading specific books that have nothing to do with the content of a book similarly, writting and reading here can be an means to an end that is not at all related to the content of the sissue discussed.

[Appreciative Reader]

Hi, um.

Actually psychological projection is a fairly straightforward term. While it may take a psychologist to correctly diagnose projection, but roughly understanding what it might be in practice, is something anyone with a broad understanding of projection can do.

Ha ha, I do agree with you, when you suggest that "... many if not all things people do are and "means to an end" and that end needs not to be related to the means at all." If I understand you correctly, I think you're suggesting that Felipe finds Brian's blog disagreeable for some other reason, but rather than discussing those reasons --- which one suspects wouldn't stand up to scrutiny --- he resorts to throwing around this pseudo-psychological criticism instead.

But let's see if he responds, and clarifies to us himself what he meant to say.

If not, sure, like you suggest I'll "leave it for what it is", and let it go, absolutely.

[um]

@ AR

Hahaha ... Felipe is not the only one writing and reading here .... me too ... hahaha ... and you and, ... all the others .

[um]

@AR

And ...

>> Actually psychological projection is a fairly straightforward term. While it may take a psychologist to correctly diagnose projection, but roughly understanding what it might be in practice, is something anyone with a broad understanding of projection can do.<<

Most if not all of these words when they are used outside the study of an psychotherapist or counselor, by non professional, get and "emotional, judgmental" load. and can create in the "hand" of an skilled debater and negative double bind for the one at the "receiving" end.

Bur I am drifting away from the content at hand here ... hahaha ... back to the coffee.

[Generation77]

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, keep in mind that these remarks come from a non-credible witness.

1) He owns that he's spent the better part of his life believing in God, and yet says that anyone who believes in God is "crazy." Ergo, he disqualifies himself as a credible witness to the matter of God's existence.
2) He not only admits that believed in God for decades but took initiation from a Guru and even traveled to India to get closer to God.
3) He's been asked repeatedly to explain where the universe and where life came from. Given that he never replies to these questions one can only conclude that he's wholly at a loss for answers. Yet he charges that the possibility of a Creator is "crazy."
4) He uses the familiar atheist trope of defining God as a person.
5) He still ardently searches for spiritual belief systems in books about Buddhism and Taoism. This clearly indicates he has a strong hunger to find a concept of God that won't offend him, and he has faith that he'll find this concept of God someday.

In summation, I ask you to take this hostile witness's testimony with a grain of salt, and moreover, I suggest you demand he provide answers as to the universe's origin and the start of life before you make the mistake of believing people of faith are crazy.

[Brian Hines]

Generation77, I should have added a crazy thing about evolution, because you obviously don't believe in it. Species evolve. So do people. For 35 years I did embrace some crazy religious ideas. For the past 17 years I've been steadily evolving toward a saner perception of reality, with most of that progress occurring early on in my evolution from religious believer to open-minded atheist.

Also, did you even read this blog post? Doesn't seem like it, since if you had, you would have read:

"If someone says, God must exist eternally, because the cosmos couldn't create itself, reply: If nothing created an eternal God, then nothing could have created an eternal cosmos, the difference being that the cosmos clearly is real, and there's no demonstrable evidence of God."

A creator of the universe must have existed eternally, or the creator would need a creator. So obviously a simpler explanation of why the universe exists is that it has always existed in one form or another, being eternal. Science doesn't know for sure how this has taken place, but reasonable theories exist that are much more believable than the simplistic "God created the universe."

[Appreciative Reader]

He's been asked repeatedly to explain where the universe and where life came from. Given that he never replies to these questions one can only conclude that he's wholly at a loss for answers. Yet he charges that the possibility of a Creator is "crazy." (...) I suggest you demand he provide answers as to the universe's origin and the start of life before you make the mistake of believing people of faith are crazy.

----------

G77, that's something you'd asked me. And I think I presented to you a fairly complete answer --- if one lacking in detailed fleshing out, because I didn't take the time and trouble to reference anything beyond my own less than perfect recall.

Let's take the former question, that I did answer in some detail at least, about how the universe was formed. You never did follow on about why you'd asked me this in the first place, or your further arguments about it, beyond merely echoing back to me the gaps that I'd myself clearly explained in our knowledge base so far.

It's clear you're going for a God of the Gaps gambit here. That's an elementary fallacy, and very easily shown up as fallacious. But I notice that you don't actually make your argument, and I'm suspecting you don't do that because you know well enough how lacking in substance is your implied argument.

Go on then, tell us this:

(1) Why do you claim Brian is "wholly at a loss for anwers", as far as the how the universe came to be question for instance, when anyone with an elementary knowledge of physics (or biology, as far as your latter question) will know enough to provide at least a broad answer, as I myself already have?

(2) IN ANY CASE, WHAT HAS THAT TO DO WITH THE GOD QUESTION AT ALL, OR WITH THE CRAZINESS OF THE KINDS OF THINGS THEISTS BELIEVE? In what way do any gaps in the knowledge that science uncovers for us --- an ever shrinking gap, mind (athough, to be fair, in a sense an ever widening gap, in as much as we start to realize that there are more things that need knowing and that we do not yet know) --- in what way exactly do you think these gaps translate into any greater credibility for the imbecilities that theists swallow whole?

Go on then, stop this hinting and implying game, and squarely lay out your argument here, so we can see if it does actually amount to anything,

[Dungeness]

@Gen...77 [ In summation, I ask you to take this hostile witness's testimony with a grain of salt, and moreover, I suggest you demand he provide answers as to the universe's origin and the start of life before you make the mistake of believing people of faith are crazy.]

No, the charging doc is wrong. IMO, he attacks ideas -rather than people-
as "crazy". Mainly so but in spirited debates he may let the odd colourful
phrase fly now and again. Surely the Court will grant a bit of indulgence
for such small peccadilloes.

The defendant argues a lack of "demonstrable evidence" for a given
belief and yet blindly continuing to do so is patently "crazy". The Court
concurs. However this in itself doesn't invalidate the so-called mystic
claim that compelling evidence may be advanced through a discipline
of mindfulness and inner devotion. The Court has no opinion on such
esoterica and renders no decision. The defendant is free to go.

However, the Court reminds both parties this is a courtroom. Watch
your language! Listen to the evidence. All of it!

[Karim W. Rahmaan]

"..there's no demonstrable evidence of God."

Posted by: Brian Hines | July 06, 2022 at 08:52 PM

This thread reminded me of when someone once asked me:

"Does God exist? And why doesn't He hear me!?"

And I said something like,
"..in my faith. There IS a God, and He's with you. And with me. And from what I've been reading in the Koran, is that the more you increase your faith, the more nearer He will be.."

Even better. My Sat Guru, Baba Ji once said something similar during a Q&A session which now to me sounds just like the same thing. He said,

"Love, is a two-way street."

[Karim W. Rahmaan]

Here's a nice quote (on faith) from the Koran:

"Say, ‘Nothing will befall us except what Allah has ordained for us. He is our master, and in Allah let all the faithful put their trust.’" -Koran (Qarai) 9/51

[Miguel Angel]

All those possible remarks about God from theists are really parodic. Who can really believe in them as a philosophic thinking?

Yet the idea of God is much more related to what you mentioned many years ago as "The Booundless Existence".(C.K..Munnitz) Maybe you do not believe anymore in that concept, given that you declare that you are not theist anymore...but whatever you appreciate it or not know, it is the basis of a true believe in God...making clear that this belief is purely a decision, valid because does not ignore any scientifical truth.

Simply is other thing.Not threatened by any "fluctuation of quantic nothingness". A

For us, philosophic theists , all those simple gullible concepts are childish, but we have to make it clear because proud atheists always insist in recalling them with strong pleasure. The pleasure of destroying senseless believes...As a rational scientifical mind,I have this feeling about many common beliefs, and I enjoy to fight them,so I take the point.

But this is not the case. We do not believe in Papa Noel or the Big Spaghetti.

It is something boundless.