Questions atheists are sick of answering. Aaaand Biscuits again, of course.

lazygal

http://www.buzzfeed.com/seancurry1/questions-atheists-are-sick-of-answering

Some good questions and answers here. Apologies if its been posted before.

SebBerkovich

I wonder if there's an Atheism+ version of that list with the addition of

16. Fancy a cup of coffee?

Mr. CooL ICE

"If you don't believe in God, then what do you believe in?"


*smack*

ShooterSF

"You dont believe in God?"
"No."
"Well what do you think happens to you when you die?"

Its amazing how often that's the first question, worded a few different ways, once someone has established the fact that Im an atheist. Very few ever seem interested in my reasons for not believing in their god. Maybe that's why some religious seem to have no problem with people believing in other gods as long as they pick one!

"What have you got to live for?".

Penn

"What if you're wrong?"

It's actually kind of a genius question though, because you can't reply "What if you're wrong?"

If God does exist and there is an afterlife, I'm wrong and I go to Hell.
If God doesn't exist and there is no afterlife, you'll never know you were wrong.

Akrasia

I always go for the Homer Simpson response to that one “And what if we picked the wrong religion? Every week we’re just making God madder and madder.”

Sarky

As an atheist, I am sick of being asked "Do you want fries with that?" No I don't! If I did, I'd have said "I'd like some fries with that"! Quit trying to make my choices for me and assuming you know what I meant to say damn it!

endacl

I'm kinda sick of saying 'no, I'll do it myself' when young fellas arrive at the door, pushing a lawnmower and touting for business.

Really must get around to that. Knee high now....

Sarky

Leave it a little longer, then get yourself a scythe. Scythes are badass. Nobody will come near your lawn again.

magicbastarder

LordChessington wrote: »

"If you don't believe in God, then what do you believe in?"


*smack*

answer 'i believe the children are our future; teach them well and let them lead the way'.

endacl

ShooterSF wrote: »

"You dont believe in God?"
"No."
"Well what do you think happens to you when you die?"

Worm partaaaaaaayyyyy!!

eviltwin

"why don't you just go out and rob a bank or kill someone since you don't believe God will judge you"

Eh, cause I don't want to go to jail and besides its wrong?

"You're just rebelling against your Catholic upbringing aren't you"

No, I'm 36, I'm not 13

SebBerkovich

eviltwin wrote: »

"You're just rebelling against your Catholic upbringing aren't you"

No, I'm 36, I'm not 13

Soon as i turn 36.. i'm totally using that.

Galvasean

"But you have to believe in SOMTHEEEEEEEEEENNNNGGGG!!!!!!"

Uh... why?

Brian Shanahan

Sarky wrote: »

Leave it a little longer, then get yourself a scythe. Scythes are badass. Nobody will come near your lawn again.

Buy a goat, same effect lower maintenance.

endacl

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Buy a goat, same effect lower maintenance.

Hmmmmmm.....

Buy both. Chase goat with scythe. Job done quicker, plus scared-goat manure....

Any 'accidents' could be dinner.

clairefontaine

I say I just don't think he's that important.

sephir0th

This usually works as a rebuttal to most of those dumb questions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZpJ7yUPwdU

Bannasidhe

Sarky wrote: »

Leave it a little longer, then get yourself a scythe. Scythes are badass. Nobody will come near your lawn again.

I have one he can borrow. I do enjoy swinging a scythe. There is something so satisfying about it.

It's nearly as much fun as making a scale model of a major city out of cardboard and pretending to be Godzilla...or so I have heard...

Sarky

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I have one he can borrow. I do enjoy swinging a scythe. There is something so satisfying about it.

It's nearly as much fun as making a scale model of a major city out of cardboard and pretending to be Godzilla...or so I have heard...

[url=https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/16986/260165.jpg[/url]

Akrasia

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Buy a goat, same effect lower maintenance.

Hold on, as a skeptic, I must query how a goat can be lower maintainance than a Scythe?

Responsible goat ownership would require significant outley of time and resources (i refer you to the British goat association guidelines
http://www.allgoats.com/)

where as a scythe is just a blade on a stick

Bannasidhe

Akrasia wrote: »

Hold on, as a skeptic, I must query how a goat can be lower maintainance than a Scythe?

Responsible goat ownership would require significant outley of time and resources (i refer you to the British goat association guidelines
http://www.allgoats.com/)

where as a scythe is just a blade on a stick

A blade on a stick which requires sharpening...on the other hand it is unlikely to eat your underwear off the line so good point.

the_syco

Number 4; who made your god? If and why, if your god existed forever, can the universe not have existed forever?

wretcheddomain

"So you believe in nothing then?"

Such a stupid question given that believing in nothing is still having a belief in something.

Moreover, since when did it become 'God or Nothing'.

Of course, my answer is, "I believe in nothing supernatural, if that answers your question."

Hotblack Desiato

the_syco wrote: »

Number 4; who made your god? If and why, if your god existed forever, can the universe not have existed forever?

It is unlikely that the observable evidence existed forever, because we observe it to be expanding at an increasing rate. Therefore there must have been a time in the past when the universe was infinitely compact. The remnants of the Big Bang are observable today. However we cannot postulate about a time before the Big Bang. We may live in the only universe that ever existed. We may live in one of an infinite cycle of bang/crunch events. We may be a Flatland-like curiosity for dwellers of a four-dimensional universe (as discussed by Carl Sagan here.) We may be living in a simulation inside a supercomputer of unimaginable power. We may be a brain in a jar fed falsified inputs. Ultimately we don't know and can't tell and it doesn't really matter anyway.

Turning your statement on its head, we can say that if the universe required a creator and the creator is god, why does god not require a creator also?

Turtwig

I know it's totally fecking inane but for questions relating to the universe's creation. I usually just tell the person asking that I believe they themselves created the universe and trapped the rest of us inside it. When they deny it I just remind them that as they can't remember their own birth they can't prove they didn't.

PopePalpatine

I think it's something that parents will have to endure: "Shure let him make his Communion/Confirmation, shure what harm will it do?"

SebBerkovich

I remember watching a debate on Canadian TV. It had Dawkins and a few other folk from the spectrum. There was a religious moderate who just kept going on about how "God means love" (as i recall Dawkins eyes almost rolled back into a 4th dimension) but there was also a really smug looking super zealot. He got his opportunity to ask Dawkins a question near the end of the show.

He asked Dawkins something like "Can you stop your heart from beating" then he followed up a confused look from Dawkins with "of course you can't only GOD can stop someones heart from beating"

Dawkins probably has a list of questions he sick of answering, but i wonder when he comes across something a crazy as this does it help break up the monotony a bit.

(i'm sure there's a video of this around the tubes somewhere)

Duggy747

I dodge these debates like the plague, the same questions always come up and people get angry, defensive, and then smug when they ask me them................and it's always them who start the goddamn topic and won't let me change the subject (which they mistake or take as a "HA, you don't have the answers, do ya!?!")

"Well.............what's the point of living, then!?!

Um.........because I like to live and experience this one life that I have? If your idea of the afterlife is going to be great then why are you still living this life where you're subject to pain and sickness as opposed to eternal bliss?

"What about morals?"

I attribute that to being raised good by my parents and knowing the difference between right and wrong as opposed to acting nice in case God punishes me.

"Your "science" can't answer everything, that's just your opinion." - This usually comes from "spiritual" people big into their Woo.

"That's just your belief"

It's not a belief!!

"Atheists only are just rebelling"

Against who, Mammy?

"Why do you even celebrate Xmas, then?" *smug face*

I like Xmas, and........*harp on about the Winter Solstice and it's hijacking*

"Derren Brown / X Atheist say psychics do exist and such powers exist"

Ara' now, come on.....

"You have to believe in something, though!"

Why do I, why is that so hard to comprehend and why does it bother you so much? What business is it of yours?

"Well, we won't know until we die"

Then leave me the hell alone.

wretcheddomain

Jernal wrote: »

I know it's totally fecking inane but for questions relating to the universe's creation. I usually just tell the person asking that I believe they themselves created the universe and trapped the rest of us inside it. When they deny it I just remind them that as they can't remember their own birth they can't prove they didn't.

If I play Devil's Advocate for a second, if I were a Christian, I'd probably reply by asking you 'How did you acquire that knowledge, where is the source?', because if you ask them that they'll say 'The Bible', and they'll take confidence in the fact they have a source (however inane) and you don't. I know where you're coming from of course but I think that's how believers would irritatingly argue against you and feel quite proud about it in the process.

shruikan2553

Duggy747 wrote: »

"Well.............what's the point of living, then!?!

I just tell them there isnt a point and if their afterlife is so great why dont we all just kill ourselves. Atheists wont have to put up with a pointless life and they'll get to meet their god. These people usually like being alive so they tend to get the point then.

wow exuberant

shruikan2553 wrote: »

I just tell them there isnt a point and if their afterlife is so great why dont we all just kill ourselves. Atheists wont have to put up with a pointless life and they'll get to meet their god. These people usually like being alive so they tend to get the point then.

Reminds me of a Hitchens debate where a Christian says "I believe all aborted babies go to heaven" followed by applause, Hitchens then says "Well wouldn't we be doing them a favour by killing them?"

The guy was speechless.

goose2005

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYW_lPlekiQ

Zombrex

goose2005 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYW_lPlekiQ

Love that. It is odd that one of the best bits in all of Star Trek ends up in one of the worst movies in all of Star Trek.

endacl

Zombrex wrote: »

Love that. It is odd that one of the best bits in all of Star Trek ends up in one of the worst movies in all of Star Trek.

And Star Trek redifines 'worst' in so many many ways!

legspin

endacl wrote: »

And Star Trek redifines 'worst' in so many many ways!

Enjoying the re-boot, mind.

endacl

legspin wrote: »

Enjoying the re-boot, mind.

If I ever get a telly, and it happens to be on that telly in the unlikely event of me ever sitting down to watch said telly, I'll give it a chance. In the meantime I'm happy to take your word for it. Having suffered through every incarnation of Star Trek thus far inflicted I'm disinclined to hunt it out.

ShowMeTheCash

Just going to give my two cent on this topic, not that it will really add anything as the thread itself is somewhat childish... But sometimes we like to be childish

I am not necessarily a Christian nor am I an atheist, from someone that was brought up in very much a Christian house hold, bible class and participated in Church events and so on I have a relatively good understanding of the bible and Christian ideology.

I find it ammusing that by definition a Christian is someone that believes in Jesus Christ (Son of God) and an Antheist is someone that holds the belief that no God exists.

I guess the first question you need to ask yourself are you a Christian? Christian belief really is soley based in the Bible... Nothing else but I would go as far to say that 90% of Christians have not read it...

Next question are you an Atheist? Being an Atheist is the belief that no god exists! Most Atheists I have talk to are really more ignostic, someone that falls into the "I do not know column" but for the most part see's organised religion as something that they do not agree with.

I think the questions and answers posted, for any intelligent individual should seem idiotic.

When something cannot be explained such as why are we here? how did we get here? why do we just not run around killing each other? in no way stregthens the argument that god must exist! Likewise it noway does it deminish the idea that god could exist.

I do not understand Christians that aruge black and blue trying to persude people that their god does exist, you cannot prove it... but I also think you have missed the point.... It's about faith, the belief in something that you cannot see, touch or smell... You will not be able to prove it, I essentially think this was the idea else it would be easy, so why are you trying too?

I think Christianity as an idea is sound if you choose to embrace it, however like most organised religions it becomes corrupted by people!!! As a species we tend to mess most things up...

Unfortunetly a lot, not all, but a lot of Christians and Atheists although bolar opposites share the same narrow minded outlook on life. Like a dog chasing it's tail, this thread is pointless!!!! Which also renders my post pointless or does it?

God I love Paradoxes

kylith

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Next question are you an Atheist? Being an Atheist is the belief that no god exists! Most Atheists I have talk to are really more ignostic, someone that falls into the "I do not know column" but for the most part see's organised religion as something that they do not agree with.

There's nothing to stop an atheist being agnostic. A lot of people on this forum would describe themselves as Agnostic Atheists; they don't believe there's a god, but they can't say for sure that there isn't

I do not understand Christians that aruge black and blue trying to persude people that their god does exist, you cannot prove it... but I also think you have missed the point.... It's about faith, the belief in something that you cannot see, touch or smell... You will not be able to prove it, I essentially think this was the idea else it would be easy, so why are you trying too?

If you want to run a system of government, or impose laws, that have a religious basis you'd damned well better be able to prove that it has a basis in reality. Otherwise it becomes what we're seeing today: "You can't have bodily autonomy because my invisible friend says so".

I think Christianity as an idea is sound if you choose to embrace it, however like most organised religions it becomes corrupted by people!!! As a species we tend to mess most things up...

Can I ask if you've read the bible? It really isn't 'a sound idea if you chose to embrace it'; it's a modern veneer of 'God loves us all' over thousands of years of bible-based slavery, oppression, control, and misogyny.

ShowMeTheCash

You are getting in an argument over words.
Atheist in the narrow sense is someone that believe no god exists.. Essentially if you are not sure then you really are not an Atheist, in the same regard if a Christian beleives in god but is not sure on the whole Jesus Christ thing, then essentially they are not a Christian....

My post was aimed at the Atheism and Christianity in the narrow sense.

I tend to agree that religion should have no place in politics due to the diverse nature of creeds and beliefs but your you idea in that they better be able to prove it albeit idealistic is simply stupid. We live in a democracy where the mob dictates who we elect to run our country... Well I have a whole different argument around government but that is for another day...

I have read the bible:
Christianity is the belief in Jesus Christ and the new testement essentially a collection of Strories and parables for one to aspire to, how you choose to interpret them is entirely up to you.... Can you give an example to your statement:

<Quote>It really isn't 'a sound idea if you chose to embrace it'; it's a modern veneer of 'God loves us all' over thousands of years of bible-based slavery, oppression, control, and misogyny.</Quote>

I stated before that it is people that tend to mess things up, the idea that a book is some how responsible for slavery, oppression, control and misogyny is a cop-out.... I am pretty sure the corrupt nature of humans is really the root cause of the above.

ShooterSF

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

You are getting in an argument over words.
Atheist in the narrow sense is someone that believe no god exists.

I believe vampires and unicorns don't exist. Doesn't mean I know they don't exist though. Remember, Atheism is a about belief not claim to knowledge. (Oh and add this to the list of questions!)

I stated before that it is people that tend to mess things up, the idea that a book is some how responsible for slavery, oppression, control and misogyny is a cop-out.... I am pretty sure the corrupt nature of humans is really the root cause of the above.

If you don't believe in the god of the bible then that seems correct. If you do however, then the blame lays on the character that is the God of the bible who is misogynistic, racist and not to concerned with democracy or slavery.

ShowMeTheCash

OK - Those who have the absence of a belief and those that that believe something does not exist. I get it, I was talking more about the latter...

The bible is a collection of books, written by a number of different people and re-written and re-written, people who wrote in line with the time in which it was written...

Christianity focuses on Christ and the books of the new testement.

Blame lays on the character that is the God of the bible who is misogynistic, racist and not to concerned with democracy or slavery.

You seem to take the view of the human understanding of something by people of a particular time and align that with your now "enlightened" undertanding of how you think god should be.

Also is previoulsy stated, the stories therein it more a testement of peoples understanding...

Even if you take this as a purely historical reference, you need to put into context of the time in which it was written and the laws that governed the land.

Can you explain to me why you feel the "God" of the new testement is the following:
misogynistic, racist and not to concerned with democracy or slavery...

I kind of already know what you argument on this will be but I fear you have missed the point I am trying to convey.

lazygal

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I fear you have missed the point I am trying to convey.

Maybe you could save us all some time and explain your point in plain English.

kylith

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

You are getting in an argument over words.
Atheist in the narrow sense is someone that believe no god exists.. Essentially if you are not sure then you really are not an Atheist, in the same regard if a Christian beleives in god but is not sure on the whole Jesus Christ thing, then essentially they are not a Christian....

My post was aimed at the Atheism and Christianity in the narrow sense.

The problem is that Atheist and Theist are not narrow definitions they cover everything from Gnostic Atheist (believing that it is possible to know there are no gods) to Gnostic Theist (believing that it is possible to know that there definitely are gods).

I tend to agree that religion should have no place in politics due to the diverse nature of creeds and beliefs but your you idea in that they better be able to prove it albeit idealistic is simply stupid.

Why is it stupid? If someone is trying to make policy based on a particular interpretation of a book then why is it stupid to demand proof that this book is in fact rooted in truth especially when the person is claiming that the book is the literal word of the creator of the universe? Surely anyone claiming that kind of authority should have to prove that they have it?

I have read the bible:
Christianity is the belief in Jesus Christ and the new testement essentially a collection of Strories and parables for one to aspire to, how you choose to interpret them is entirely up to you.... Can you give an example to your statement:

It really isn't 'a sound idea if you chose to embrace it'; it's a modern veneer of 'God loves us all' over thousands of years of bible-based slavery, oppression, control, and misogyny.

Slavery and oppression: When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

Misogyny: Gang rape is AOK in the bible: Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go." (Judges 19:24-25)

Women have no authority: "Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

A woman gets raped? Her attacker gets off with a fine, and she is forced to marry him: If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silvers, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

"For from garments cometh a moth, and from women wickedness. Better is the churlishness of a man than a courteous woman, a woman, I say, which bringeth shame and reproach." (Eccles. 42:13-14)

I stated before that it is people that tend to mess things up, the idea that a book is some how responsible for slavery, oppression, control and misogyny is a cop-out.... I am pretty sure the corrupt nature of humans is really the root cause of the above.

The book gives absolute permission to murder, rape, and pillage anyone and everyone who is not a Christian (or Jew, as the case would be in the OT). If you want to claim that

"Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)"

is the word of a loving god and that it's humans who have misinterpreted it (though it's hard to misinterpret:

""Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told." (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT))

, then I would suggest that you expand your biblical reading beyond the NT, the Psalms, and the lovely old Book of Ruth

kylith

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

The bible is a collection of books, written by a number of different people and re-written and re-written, people who wrote in line with the time in which it was written...

Would you not then agree that since the bible has been re-written who knows how many times in line, as you say, with the times that it is therefore incorrect to refer to it as 'the word of God', and that it is also incorrect to use the bible to to justify one's, for example, denial of bodily autonomy to women?

ShowMeTheCash

lazygal wrote: »

Maybe you could save us all some time and explain your point in plain English.

It is easy to argue the flaws in the bible, I can easily pull out quotes from the bible i.e. Leviticus 18:22 and say this is clearly predujice against gay people... Numerous passages where the bible talks about people owning other people which appears to support the idea of salvery i.e. Exodus 20:17 etc.. etc.. (You will probably find more reference to this in the old testament)

My point is this, whether the bible was inspired by god or simply the construct of a book of rules for people to somehow manipulate the masses it was written none the less by people, flawed people who at that time had a flawed understanding... People can choose to believe in the god of the bible and choose to ignore the limited understanding and narrow minded ideas of the people that it or at least understand popular opinion of the time.
It has been suggested you cannot that they are one and the same... And somehow this "god" is somehow reponsible for the stupidity of the actions of people....
Again I think if people want to be brainwashed and do stupid things that is on them.
Similarly using the argument to discredit the idea of god due to peopleslimit understanding I think equally idiotic.

ShowMeTheCash

kylith wrote: »

Would you not then agree that since the bible has been re-written who knows how many times in line, as you say, with the times that it is therefore incorrect to refer to it as 'the word of God', and that it is also incorrect to use the bible to to justify one's, for example, denial of bodily autonomy to women?

I do agree with you on this, I have no doubt in my mind that the bible has been changed and re-changed to fit the motives of those who wrote it.

ShooterSF

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Blame lays on the character that is the God of the bible who is misogynistic, racist and not to concerned with democracy or slavery.

You seem to take the view of the human understanding of something by people of a particular time and align that with your now "enlightened" undertanding of how you think god should be.

I don't think "how god should be". I don't believe in a god. I was simply pointing out that IF you believe in the god of the bible then it's not humanity's fault that said god has the characteristics it does.

Can you explain to me why you feel the "God" of the new testement is the following:
misogynistic, racist and not to concerned with democracy or slavery...

I kind of already know what you argument on this will be but I fear you have missed the point I am trying to convey.

Strange way to word your question but ok I'll start simple and ask some questions,

1. There are plenty of quotes throughout the bible that attribute such characteristics to the god of the bible. Do you contest that?

2. The god of the old testament is the same god as the one of the new testament. Do you contest that?

kylith

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I do agree with you on this, I have no doubt in my mind that the bible has been changed and re-changed to fit the motives of those who wrote it.

So you would agree the god of the bible is a man-made construct? What, then, is the point of having faith it exists and worshipping it if it's madey-uppy?

SebBerkovich

In keeping with the current context of the thread i would like to add that i hate when i have to invoke the Bible when asked a question about religion...
Because it always ends the same way once you go down that road

me: Have you read that thing, It's racist and crazy.
them: You can't take it literally it's a metaphor
me: So... maybe the whole hating the gays thing is a metaphor
them: OH NO! God was being serious about that part
me: i'm out... <drops mic>