I'm askin' for it..

154 posts / 0 new
Last post
JamieB's picture

That was so good.:) thanx

Slyrish's picture
I couldn't say any better

I couldn't say any better than what Steven Doolittle said. Of course not all of us hate religious people. I wouldn't be surprised if most of us didn't, but as a qualifier, I'll say many don't. As for myself, I'm dating a devout protestant, so I'm obviously not hateful of them. But it's important to realise that religious ideas are no more immune to criticism than any other philosophy. Sometimes, this criticism comes in the form of ridicule, though typically in the form of debate. I can say something about capitalism or the American Republican party and get relatively tame feedback, but the moment religion is brought up, the conversation takes a darker tone. So basically, ridicule of so-called "sacred" ideas should be normalised so we can have an actual conversation.

mrlong's picture
I signed up as a non-atheist

I signed up as a non-atheist as I've been studying Buddhism for the last several years. I was raised in the United Church of Canada which I found to be very free and non-demanding. My parents belonged to the Masons and Eastern Star and were really free thinkers. A while ago I heard that the United Church in Ontario has hired an Atheist as a minister. They said it was so they could get a view of them and see that they knew love too. It's quite surprising to me that they did this, but like I say, it's a very free religion. There's a book written by one that's called 'Maybe (Maybe Not) - Second Thoughts from a Secret Life. It was a long time ago that I read it, but it seems it starts out by saying that the Bible originally started out with the saying Maybe, Maybe Not, and I always thought it meant to think when you read it. I was quite happy with the thinking (though it might have been just me) due to all the crap that's in the Bible. I'll have to read it again to make sure what I thought 45 years ago is right, but I've been kind of taken away from Christianity with all the shit that religion causes (though most of the trouble comes from radicals). I was raised in a Mormon community and didn't really appreciate them - they had the majority in the school and I always felt like an outsider. I had Mormon friends that used to drink and do drugs with me and they were very good friends, and I love seeing them when I do. They're quite well known as a cult and dwell on making money and getting new members. I've heard that they never mention Jesus in their sermons and don't have him hanging from the cross anywhere. All I know is their funerals last forever and you hear speakers saying how much they loved and appreciated the dead people that they hated when they were living. It all seem so phony to me. When I was indoctrinated into my church I had to say that I'd given my soul to Jesus or something, and I made my minister cry when I told him that I didn't mean it. I recently took a Udemy course called The Power of Vulnerability by Brene' Brown. She says in it that love and belonging are irreducible things. I think that most people attend church to have these things, and most don't really care how much truth is in the sermons. It's very hard to drag them away from it. I know I did find some meaning in the sermons once in a while, but I was always looking for something that dealt more with reality, and that's what I found in Buddhism - Zen at any rate - don't know what the other sects teach. I wore the tapes 'Waking up in the Present' out, and now I have the ebook. My thoughts are that I don't actually care if there's a God or there was a Jesus. I just want to have the best life I can.

Eyes Open's picture
"And also, why some Atheists

"And also, why some Atheists mock, make fun of, and ridicule my beliefs?"

First of all, I would explain that as with anything imaginary it gets a bit embarrassing the older you get. We all believe in santa and the tooth fairy when we are kids but as we grow up some of us go down the path of logic and reason and scientific fact. Others, like yourself, decide to keep believing in the impossible, improbable, and the, dare I say it, batshit crazy.

Had no one ever told you at an early age there was a god, and the first time you heard about it was as a 25 year old who had spent their life adhering to logic and reason, you would laugh at the possibility of an invisible man hiding in the sky and ridicule the person trying to make you believe it. It's all mental, the concept of it and the practice of it.

Religion is a money making, tax dodging machine which hinders progress and is responsible for more deaths than aids and anyone who believes in it should be kept away from the rest of us cos they are fucking mental.

xenoview's picture
Necromancy at work.

Necromancy at work.

celiz's picture
This comment and the

This comment and the questions asked in it strike me as odd. If you are intellectually curious enough to wonder why some atheists mock or belittle your beliefs then you must also be intellectually curious enough to have noticed that believers of other faiths mock your beliefs and people of your faith mock the rest of us. The greater question would probably be why do people seek to put themselves and others into such distinguishable groups of in and out, same and other.

To be perfectly honest, I don't care at all that you believe in Jesus. If it makes you happy, good for you. I only begin to care when a belief in Jesus means denying science that keeps humans safe and when it means ostracizing and harming others, as is so often the case. When believing in Jesus means trying to actually follow the example of Christ (which I find to be the minority of people) then I'm all for it.

Andrew, aka FormerTheist's picture
"So, I would like to know

"So, I would like to know what you guys think about people like myself who believe in Jesus Christ. I would like to know why some Athiests seem to hate followers of Jesus. (Not saying everyone feels this way). And also, why some Atheists mock, make fun of, and ridicule my beliefs?"

First answer - I don't hate you, nor have I met any atheists who "hate" "followers of Jesus". I/They, however, may be angry at some of those "followers" for their insistence on laws that allow a "special status" for their beliefs - laws to teach Christianity and the evangelical lies and untruths about creation to children, laws that allow Christians rights to discriminate, etc. We get angry about the self-righteous behaviour of those "followers" who use such passive-aggressive B.S. as "I'll pray for you". We get angry that we are demonized by those "followers" for simply finding their beliefs ridiculous and unworthy of our time.

And that leads to my second answer - beliefs should always be challenged. I'm not disrespecting you by mocking your beliefs, because you are not your beliefs. Beliefs do not deserve respect, people do, but respect is still earned.
We must mock and challenge beliefs because failure to do so can lead to some very unfortunate and damaging happenings as a result.
Witness the beliefs of the KKK - should we respect them, or is it okay to mock them?
What about Nazi beliefs? Mock or respect?

Your beliefs are, to many of us, (sorry to say) ridiculous. They require a complete separation from reality and a willingness to believe something without any evidence, and evidence is something on which most of us insist. You rely on nothing more than a book and a feeling to guide you, because there is absolutely no evidence of a god. Now, you can argue that nature is evidence of a god, but it really isn't. Nothing in our world requires anything supernatural to explain it, and the claims in the bible are easily disproven.
Now, let me ask you some questions:
1. Why do you believe?
2. Do you believe in the biblical account of creation or do you accept the fact of evolution?

JamesIV's picture
I respect those who have

I respect those who have religious beliefs as I too used to be a firm believer in Christ. But I read the entire bible after a life threatening crash and divorce and I couldn't find enough love to fill up a thimble.


Attach Image/Video?: 

JamesIV's picture
I respect those who have

I respect those who have religious beliefs as I too used to be a firm believer in Christ. But I read the entire bible after a life threatening crash and divorce and I couldn't find enough love to fill up a thimble.


Attach Image/Video?: 

You can have your beliefs, just don't force them on me's picture
Now, you can have your

Now, you can have your beliefs as a Christian in any branch, and I won't care. Sure, I'll think you're a bit like a sheep for following the church, but it's your choice, not mine.

But it's when religious people start to try and force the religion on athiests, and curse us, that we get annoyed. We don't interfere with your beliefs, so why do you try to interfere with ours?

So, as a summary; you can be Christian and I don't mind. But if you force it on me, I will have a problem with you

OUTSIDER's picture
Your only problem, Jj, like

Your only problem, Jj, like anyone else believer in any religion, is ignorance.
If you only knew how the bible has been created, assembled, by distorting historical facts (verifiable through other historians texts), deleting other historical facts and historians' books (verifiable, we have texts from other historians who said these books existed), and how the christian religion has been ENFORCED WITH UNBELIEVABLE VIOLENCE both in Roman Empire times but even worse during the Dark Ages, you wouldn't be a believer.
I don't contest a belief in "a god": I don't want to say I have a sure answer about if a god exists or not, and I think nobody can say it at this point, yet.
What I contest is that each and any religion in the world is a false, coming from paganism and copied from other religions.
So to make it short, Jj, you believe only because you don't really know in what you believe.
Jesus never existed.
Yeowah is an invention.
The whole story of the profet born from a virgin is much older than christianism, which only COPIED a myth of a guy that was called Yeszeuz Christna (notice any resemblance?).
Get your information, find books written by HISTORIANS that gave their life to study HISTORY and THE BIBLE, to find THE TRUTH about how it was conceived and assembled. Only then you will know in what you are believing. You are being brutally scammed by Vatican pedophiles who make huge amounts of money out of this scam.

Matt's picture
Hi JJ, and welcome.

Hi JJ, and welcome.

You ask "what you guys think about people like myself who believe in Jesus Christ. I would like to know why some Athiests seem to hate followers of Jesus. (Not saying everyone feels this way). And also, why some Atheists mock, make fun of, and ridicule my beliefs?"

That's a fairly complex question so I'll break it down a bit. First up I don't claim to answer for all atheists - we're not a club - just for myself.

So what do I think of you as a person? You seem like a nice enough person, at least you seem to have manners which is more than I can say for many of your fellow religious followers that come on here, so there's a plus for you.

Why do atheists hate followers of jesus? Short answer, we don't, hate the followers, we hate the religion. FYI as far as most of us are concened there's no difference between followers of jesus, allah, buddha, brahma, zues, or quetzalcoatl... all your imaginary friends are the same to us. Now, a great many of us DO hate the religions you people like to follow because of the hatred, persecution, wars, greed, and so on you do in the name of whichever imaginary friend you believe in while proclaiming to be better than everyone else. I'm sure you'll counter with "but my religion is good, it does these good, charitable acts". Perhaps so, but does it do them "for people it deems worthy"? Does it withhold it's charity from people whose religion, politics, or sexuality it disagrees with? Does it perform these acts with the expectation that the recipients will listen to their proselytizing? And in the long run, if it is actually interested in DOING GOOD why does it need to be doing that IN THE NAME OF A CHUCH? Isn't it enough to do good in the name of good itself? Doesn't your bible actually speak AGAINST doing good in return for recognition? (It does, research it.)

Why do you we mock your beliefs? Because your beliefs are unfounded, disproven, ridiculous superstitions, because people whg follow them tend to demand equal time for their superstitions along with science, and because their followers often do harm and evil in the names of their various imaginary friends.

In return I have questions for you. What did you come here seeking? Are you attempting to find truth, or to convert us? Did you find what you were looking for?

Have a great day.

Michael Gill's picture
Hi Jj

Hi Jj

You make a number of assumptions. If you really are interested in philosophy, first you must teach yourself how to spot an assumption.

Looking for a discussion, you ask why we are here on this earth. You assume that because you ask a question, the question has an answer. But consider the possibility that the question you asked is a non question ... in that the question itself is meaningless and cannot be answered.

Let me give you an example: What is further north than the North Pole?

On the face of it, it seems reasonable. You travel north and if you are ignorant of the shape of the Earth, you can reasonably expect to keep traveling north. But once you know what you are asking, you know that if you keep traveling north in a straight line, you get to a point where you are suddenly traveling south ... or if you stand right on that spot and ask yourself, "what is north of here?", you will understand that what you are asking is a non-question.

It's important to note here that I'm not disparaging ignorance or the ignorant. It's usually not their fault and can be easily fixed (with the exception of the willfully ignorant - but that's another argument)

Why do you think "why are we here?" is a valid question?

As for respect of opinions. Some people have some pretty horrible opinions and I refuse to respect for the sake of it. I do not respect the opinions of, for example, those who mutilate their childrens' genitals merely because they believe in a very old book that has been translated / mistranslated dozens of times. You must earn respect.


onewire's picture

So, I would like to know what you guys think about people like myself who believe in Jesus Christ. I would like to know why some Athiests seem to hate followers of Jesus. (Not saying everyone feels this way). And also, why some Atheists mock, make fun of, and ridicule my *beliefs*?

Mike De Fleuriot's picture
Without using your scriptures

Without using your scriptures, could you show that gods of any sort can actually exist. This is the problem I have with theists, they make the assumption that gods are real and then jump directly to naming them and explaining what these gods demand and want of others. Remember the bible/Qur'an etc are the claims, the assumptions first and they have never been shown to be true.

Once you start to address this question, you will come to understand why atheists are. And if you come to address this question, then you are on the way to the dark side and will be welcomed by us.

ThatGuyVince's picture
I don't dislike the religious

I don't dislike the religious so much as I dislike the ideology. Teaching young children that if they fuck up they burn for eternity is tantamount to child abuse, and people have a tendency to hang onto things they learn early in life, so it's very difficult for most to develop new ideas about things like religion since it was ingrained at a young age.

As for the ridicule, well... that's not my thing, as I'm not looking to 'save' anyone or change any minds. Just imagine for a second that I wholeheartedly believed and was trying with all of my might to convince you that the Flying Spaghetti Monster was the one true god and that you needed to repent or burn.

To us, all of the existing 'gods' existence and power is just as ridiculous as the notion of the FSM.

As for respecting your views... well, I won't openly ridicule you, but I certainly don't respect your views, just like I don't respect the views of flat-earthers or Holocaust deniers.


Attach Image/Video?: 

a3vido's picture
... they can put us on a

... they can put us on a deserted island with ample food and shelter. We can drink socially as much as you want and we'll talk about anything and everything. When you go off to pray, I'll give you your space.... but please never pray for me nor forgive; to pray unless you have proven psychic powers will be disingenuous. To forgive is condescending as what gauge deems you better than me and what gives you the knowledge that I can not be granted???
Other than that, we'd be OK.


Attach Image/Video?: 

Ddyer617's picture
Well Jj I hope this sheds

Well Jj I hope this sheds some light without being hostile:

Firstly, ALL we Atheists want IS an intelligent discussion on the myriad of topics that are being studied by the most learned people on the planet. We desire answers to the great questions of our time through rigorous scientific analysis which shouldn't be hindered by the motivation of a decreased congregation. For centuries it was punishable by death to argue the egocentricism of europeans and the church in relation to the origin and position of the earth, the origin and evolution of our species, and the sociocultural standards of people based on race or gender of the time. (Imagine how much further advanced our civilization could be if science wasn't hindered by religion).

Secondly, hostility is met in kind and rarely is it found that a Christian has developed their relationship with "God" through love or peace. When I say this I do not mean that Christianity, true Christianity, is not founded in peace and love moreover that followers are gathered because of another motive: Fear. That fear that an eternity of suffering awaits or that you'll be ostracized by your family or community because you don't have some religious affiliation has reaped more followers than The Sermon on the Mount ever will. You can't successfully force peace and love with a gun to someone's head, that peace and love isn't on the terms of the person and is essentially a hostage situation; meaning a very large percentage of Christians have a grand scale type of Stockholm''s Syndrome. We try to question the "definitive" faith-based conclusions drawn by Christian "scholars" and we're met with cries of "Blasphemy!", "Devil Worshipper!", and "You're going to hell!" by one Christian group while another tries to explain you have to have faith and just accept a fable that can repeatedly be refuted by scientific research and experiments.

Thirdly, the text Christians hold so dear to themselves was a political ploy construed by Emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicea...300 years after the life and death of Jesus. The persecution of early christians had started to become less and less popular so in a long period of legal measures Constantine and the part of Rome that didn't collapse repealed the outlawing of Christianity in the early 300s before it was eventually made the official religion of Rome 70 years later. They picked and chose what to put in the bible to make the religion look "good" and combined "pagan" holidays with Christian ones to make a cultural merge easier. Now today their are how many different sects of Christians? Remember the story of the Tower of Babel: where those faithful to God tried to build a tower to Him...think of Religion as the Tower built to bring people closer to "God", seems to have played out just as told.

 We haven't really touched the atrocities  inspired by "modern" Christianity: US Manifest Destiny...The Crusades...The Holocaust...The Spanish Inquisition...The Salem Witch Trials...The French Revolution...Witholding basic Civil Rights from Women and Humans Rights from People of Color...Shootings in Churches and Schools...The trail of blood left in the wake of such a "peaceful" religion would be funny if it wasn't so utterly horrible. Millions have perished in the Christian's quest for vengeance for the death of their Lord and persecution of their early followers. I find that quite ironic for a religion taught to turn the other cheek.

I talked about the Sermon on the Mount earlier, the new directions of Christ to his eventual followers. Luke Chapter 6 outlines this so lets break it down into just  parts: Luke 6:20-23 inspires hope to those suffering. Luke 6:24-26 advises those in positions to provide help to the less fortunate to do so. Luke 6:27-36 talks loving and forgiving your enemies as much as you do your family and mentions the all important golden rule, "Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself." Luke 6:37-42 discusses not judging others or thinking yourself above anyone and, bearing in mind the previous passage, that includes our enemies. Luke 6:43-49 talks about the fruits born out of your labors and that if you don't have a solid foundation and put valuable effort into your endeavors you shouldn't expect much success. Many of these qualities I only see shown between believers and withheld from those who remain skeptical.

When looking at politicians that talk about shunning refugees, withholding civil rights from people due to their race/economic status/sexual orientation, taking money from the poor and giving more benefits to the rich, waging socialcultural and military warfare on groups with non-Judeo or non-Koran based religious beliefs, and the constant judgement of people exercising their right to choose what they think is best for themselves along with the constant threat of removing those rights to make those choices...who are they using as their platform to disenfranchise and divide?

We find that it's egotistical to believe that all of existence revolves around this one simple ball that is microscopic in the grand scheme of the universe and that we shouldn't take advantage of the abilities we have to keep this planet in as good a condition as possible. Life may be a gift but that doesn't mean it was necessarily given to us by any being, and that in no way diminishes the value of the gift. Each teaching from all of history's theologians, philosophers, and scientists  as well as debates which have resulted in modern laws and rights have put our species in a state of constant cultural evolution to which no single person or government can claim sole responsibility. To me the most important part of the process is that we all have to work together in order to find equilibrium or we will remain in an eternal state of conflict.

The current hostilities between people with conservative values and those more liberal minded are the byproduct of centuries worth of propaganda that related non-Christian with communists, "demons", witchcraft, and the responsibility of ruining each following generation. How do you expect atheists to coexist with a group that constantly compares them to the greatest evils in existence? All Atheists ask for is to continue to explore the greatest questions of our existence and stop placing a cap on our efforts or accusing us of being the bane of existence.

I want to close with this, you have posed this question to a group for Atheists made up of Atheists. Any hostility you may see from our group is just as common as you would see hostility from certain Christian sects, but not nearly as violent or divisive. Inside jokes meant for other Atheists by Atheists reflect our experience with religious followers. We never go into debates with Christians trying to be hostile but we know where it's going to end up, with us being told we're sinners and that we're steering the world to hell, a conversational direction that hardly could ever end peacefully. Why does finding actual truth versus assuming a story told by very uneducated people thousands of years ago is truth?

Hope this clears up some stuff,

Recovering Catholic

Alex's picture
So two parter here, first

So two parter here, first will be my personal subjective and anecdotal experience with believers. Then I'll drift into a complete generalization about most atheists I know, including myself. The reason for this is, well.. because our generalizations don't usually ever really give us a great indication as to WHY a bias is being made, or a behavior is happening. Sometimes we think the worst or best of larger groups, than we do of individuals. But what is really seems to be, is more of a grey area between the two extremes.

Hate is a strong word. I don't really "hate" people in general, so let's settle for dislike. As hate is my active state of ruining an individual, and never targeted at a group for fear of harming innocent people. I do dislike Christians in general, because of some very common things I run into with a larger majority of them. First and greatest I'd say is having been one, and living the abuse of thought. I was taught to conflate the ideas of truth and evidence with those of belief and faith. To look down upon "negative" emotions and to distance myself from them, such as hate, anger, jealousy, fear, etc. To accept a sacrifice for my wrong doings because my very creator would have nothing to do with me unless I allowed a third party to absolve me of them, instead of justly taking the punishment I was due. To preach this gospel to others under the condition that I was saving them, and that a great majority of others were not saved and would not live eternally. I was taught incorrect assumptions about science, and a vastly defiant history and archaeology that ran in conflict with reality.

Now then, in meeting a Christian, I don't assume they have ALL been through the same ringer. I start by assuming they are people, just like me, whose lives are usually governed by mundane principals such as wanting respect, and respecting others. Often times what will happen is, we will at some point be put into a position one or neither of us will feel comfortable with, and then asked to explain why it is we are uncomfortable. I find my dislike broaches at that very moment - when a person presents a "Christian" reason for their discomfort, instead of one grounded in reality. They use the Bible, doctrine, or just flat culture of their particular church as the reason behind their discomforted actions. And let's be honest, chances are a Christian is going to be far more discomforted in life than I am. Often times when probed, a Christian might stay silent, excuse themselves from the conversation, preach, engage in hostilities, or even rebuttals of being a victim. I personally find this behavior funny, because it is so childish. Here's the honest Christian, portraying themselves in a dishonest fashion, having not ever really adopted biases they profess, because they know just how out of sorts they really are. They are caught in a conundrum, of being told to do the "right thing" and yet knowing deep down, what they are doing, isn't really "right". If it was, it wouldn't feel so uncomfortable.

There's so many different circumstances you can take for an example. Be it expectations of modesty or language. Be it, being offered drugs at some party. Or even talking about the history and relevance of the Bible itself. Christians feel they HAVE to defend this utmost of purity, even if it goes against their own reasoning; Whereas an atheist can just as easily have the same result as a Christian - yet give their reasoning or even simply admit - "I don't know why I feel this way yet, maybe I'll think about it."

The very act of seeing someone so intractable in situations of pressure, who's otherwise so positive of the world and nature of everything around them, gives us Atheists this mirth, Many of us having been there, also realize what it is, and kind of at the same time feel sorry for it, even if we never meant to put you in that situation. We try as we might, to help you out by asking questions, getting to the bottom of it, maybe even lifting you up and helping you find your own reasons to stand on. But more often as not, it's seen as some form of attack. Then the accusations start. Suddenly, we "hate you." We "attack you" for questioning things. Or we're seen as "poking fun" for drawing up conclusions based on logical comparisons, facts or history.

In general, after awhile of seeing this happen time and time again, many of us (I'd almost say the great portion of the older Atheists) get jaded, sarcastic, and distance ourselves from believers. We have no want to explain it over and over again. We find solace in circles of science and wonders of the natural world. We facepalm the moment we see the Christians headline a California ban on conversion therapy, as a possibility of banning the Bible itself. And yes, we do make fun of it, because if we took it seriously we'd likely end up in the very war so many Christians are just hoping will happen, or think already has.

Personally, I'd rather stay the comedian - ever hopeful that you folks can turn it around.

MrocSbtto's picture


I personally believe that your statement varies from case to case and atheist to atheist. I have no problem with religious people, until their beliefs start taking over their daily life’s. Me ex and her family were Christians, one summer they invite me to stay over with them under the condition that I go with them to church on Sundays. I agreed, but as an atheist I can’t always hide my dark sense of humor or unconscious mockery of religion. One night my ex comes into the guest bedroom crying, saying that her parents and her are worried about me and that I don’t believe in salvation. She insisted that I agree upon having sessions with her where she would show me how the love of Jesus could change my life, with only a week left of summer I agreed, and the moment I got home I called her to say that we were through.
I don’t need to believe in heaven or hell to be a good person, I don’t need to listen to Christian music to have a good time, I don’t need to follow a food schedule because of an interpretation of a book.
I don’t hate religious people like that. In fact, I pity them. If you really require to use an old book and interpretation of old stories as a moral and ethical compass, I really do feel pity for you.

FaithfulAndFaithless's picture
I don’t hate believers. I

I don’t hate believers. I hate what belief has done to society. The faith religious people put in a belief system with no factual foundation has been the source of more death than anything else in the history of humanity. Persecution of other religions just because some stupid book(s) say(s) the practitioners of other religions are wrong, heretic, false, infidels, and should therefore die is absurd.

There is zero hard evidence of some intelligent creator.

If we have a creator, who created them?

Where does it end?

Religion, to me, is refusing to be accountable for all the atrocities of humanity. Blame it on Satan, blame it on free will, blame it on god’s great plan and the fabric of the universe and this big tapestry being created.

Bullshit! Stand up and acknowledge that humans are filthy animals and the only way to further evolve as intelligent beings is to hold each other and all of humanity accountable for our actions toward each other. We do not need some religious book for this, we just need to treat each other respectfully and equally and with care.

Making laws based on some fictional book is absurd. Would you vote for someone who thinks we should be making laws based on Harry Potter?

I see most religious people as under-educated.

arakish's picture
Hey FnF, you faithlessly

Hey FnF, you faithlessly faithful heathen. ;-)

Welcome to our corner of the internet. Or as the Christians would put it, "Welcome to Hell."

Would you vote for someone who thinks we should be making laws based on Harry Potter?

I would.


Sheldon's picture
Bravo, very good post.

Bravo, very good post.

vladimir9000's picture
I personally disagree with

I personally disagree with most religions since they are all based on loose ideologies as well as great claims with no evidences. Just like people would refuse to believe in Bigfoot or UFOs with lack of evidence so do people refuse to believe in the great claims of religion. What makes those ancient texts, made by people who had no idea what the world was like, so believable, or in fact more believable than other religious texts like those of Greek or Egyptian religions? Like Carl Sagan once said "Great claims demand great evidence." Skepticism is logical, it is natural and it shouldn't be taken for granted. But what I truly dislike more than religion is religious bigotry, either from from high ranking people in the religious business that desire only power (one example is the religious authority in my country erasing a well made abstract expressionist graffiti depicting a religious icon due to it being '"sacrilegious") or from people who are so narrow minded that they refuse to see the world in other ways. I myself am a nihilist and see religion also as a way to self-importance, the belief that we are special when in fact we aren't, the belief that something great protects us when in fact the world is proof of the opposite. Furthermore, religious morals are outdated and traditions are quite barbaric and offensive. I can go more into detail but I think I've said enough. No hard feelings though.

Tin-Man's picture
@Vladimir Re: "I can go

@Vladimir Re: "I can go more into detail but I think I've said enough. No hard feelings though."

Heck, ain't no hard feelings on THIS end. By all means, please keep going as far as I'm concerned. You are doing a great job thus far. Welcome to the AR.

Amin's picture
First and foremost what do

First and foremost what do you mean by saying follower of Jesus?
We have no reason to hate some one base on their creed however most of the people of faith have an idea of supremacy, religous supremacy in the interaction with other people with different faith manifests itself in two ways: first they look at other poeple with pitty and think they should do whatever they can to insert their faith.
Second Treat others as inferior.
Thats the core of any form religion: US versus THEM

By using the term of follower of Jesus i assume your an Evangelist because you want to distance yourself from Catholic church.

Vast majority of Evangelists are against science until they get sick,
Again vast majority of Evangelists deny Climate Change because they believe God promissed Noah after flood he wont punish humanity so Evangelists deny even the possibility of we are causing damage to our environment.
You are pro-life thats respectful, „Life“ such precious gift yes? You talk so much about abortion and unborn baby killing, have you ever talked about born children that has been murdered in wars. I have never heard any Evangelist Church talking against war.
There is lots of things i can tell you why people like me dislike your Idea of „follower of Christ“
This idea is not from a godless person like me is from a Christian called Chris Hedges he said - i am froofrasing- the Evangelist movement in USA has been turned to a Christian Fascism.
He said it before Donald Trump. Donald Trump prooved his point.

At the end i will not talk about legitimacy of your Holy book or any Holy book because evidence talks for itself.
If you read Bible to a toddler that hasnt been indoctorinated, he/she will have some quastions about the accuracy of your holy book.

eric knutson's picture
What you believe is your

What you believe is your business.

Ganrossy's picture
Firstly, you are wrong.

Firstly, you are wrong. There is zero evidence that Jesus or any other God does anything to the world now or previously. By evidence I mean observable, repeatable phenomena, and observations that support concepts that are falsifiable (ie there is an observation or set of observations that could be observed that can prove your hypothesis wrong). There is nothing observed in this world which for which the idea of a supernatural being is the best/strongest/required concept Secondly, you use your erroneous, unevidenced ideas in ways that harm many people.

Calilasseia's picture
Although this is an old

Although this is an old thread, I think it apposite to contribute here ...

I am a follower of Jesus. If you'd like to know more of my reason and interest for being on this site feel free to read my profile.

I may indulge after my post.

So let me start off by saying, I respect all of your views and reasons for being Athiest [sic]. I am not here to convince anyone to believe in anything that they don't want to. I'm not here to hurt feelings or judge. I am here because I like a damn good discussion on the philosophical aspects of why we are all here on this earth as human beings! That's some good shit to talk about!

At this point, I have to tell you something important. Namely, that philosophy, when done properly, is not about finding answers to questions, but rather, determining which questions are proper to ask.

Unfortunately, philosophy has been, in some quarters, hijacked by the assertionist brigade. Nietzsche had his own insight into this matter in Beyond Good & Evil. My own copy thereof being the Penguin Classics Edition, ISBN 0 14 044513 7. The following quote is from page 36 thereof:

What makes one regard philosophers half mistrustfully and half mockingly is not that one again and again detects how innocent they are - how often and how easily they fall into error and go astray, in short their childishness and childlikeness - but that they display altogether insufficient honesty, while making a mighty and virtuous noise as soon as the problem of truthfulness is even remotely touched on. They pose as having discovered and attained their real opinions through the self-evolution of a cold, pure, divinely unperturbed dialectic (in contrast to the mystics of every rank, who are more honest and more stupid than they - these speak of 'inspiration'): while what happens at bottom is that a prejudice, a notion, an 'inspiration', generally a desire of the heart sifted and made abstract, is defended by them with reasons sought after the event - they are one and all advocates who do not want to be regarded as such, and for the most part no better than cunning pleaders for their prejudices, which they baptise 'truths' - and very far from possessing the courage of the conscience which admits this fact to itself, very far from possessing the good taste of the courage which publishes this fact, whether to warn a foe or a friend or out of high spirits and in order to mock itself. The tartuffery, as stiff as it is virtuous, of old Kant as he lures us along the dialectical bypaths which lead, more correctly, mislead, to his 'categorical imperative' - this spectacle makes us smile, we who are fastidious and find no little amusement in observing the subtle tricks of old moralists and moral-preachers. Not to speak of that hocus-pocus of mathematical form in which, as if of iron, Spinoza encased and masked his philosophy - 'the love of his wisdom', to render that word fairly and squarely - so as to strike terror into the heart of any assailant who should dare to glance at this invincible maiden and Pallas Athene - how much personal timidity and vulnerability this masquerade of a sick recluse betrays!

The condensed version of the above, is that Nietzsche castigates those 'philosophers' who erect a metaphysic, in pursuit of the agenda of trying to impose an ethic on the universe and its contents, regardless of whether such imposition is actually warranted. Though the proper generalisation of the above, consists of castigating those 'philosophers' who erect assertions, with the intent of having those assertions regarded as "axioms" about the world, regardless of whether or not those assertions actually deserve to be treated thus. It is this latter category of person that I refer to as "assertionist" above: those individuals who are in the business of pretending that their fabrications dictate how reality behaves, regardless of how much reality disagrees with this. This is a dangerous path that anyone interested in genuine philosophical inquiry should avoid at all costs. Having seen the manner in which certain mischief makers (I'm thinking here of the neo-Thomist brigade led by Edward Feser) seek to warp philosophy into apologetics via such devices, I regard any such moves with the suspicion they manifestly deserve, and so should you.

Respect for your opinion, respect for mine as well.

Except, of course, that opinion is discardable with the same ease with which it is disseminated. Treating opinion as possessing equal discoursive weight to evidentially supported postulates, is another fallacy you should avoid studiously.

So, I would like to know what you guys think about people like myself who believe in Jesus Christ.

I regard adherence to any mythology as an exercise in exquisitely crafted absurdity. Because one of the features that mythologies have in common, is that they present blind assertions as if those assertions constituted fact. An important lesson for you, and indeed for every human being on the planet to learn, is that assertions, when first presented, posses the status "truth value unknown". Do not commit the elementary error of thinking that I regard assertions as not possessing a truth-value: every assertion is, at bottom, a proposition, and possesses a truth-value on that basis, but it does not possess a known truth-value at the beginning. In the interests of rigour, it is important to make that distinction explicit. What converts an assertion into a proposition with a known truth-value, is test of that assertion. Until such test is devised and performed, the epistemological deficit I have just described remains in place. The technical complexities of determining proper tests for different categories of assertion, I leave for another time, save to mention briefly two important classes thereof: [1] assertions resolvable by recourse to observational data (see: empirical sciences), and [2] assertions resolvable via proof procedures within formal axiomatic systems (see: pure mathematics).

Indeed, one problem endemic to mythological assertions, is that they purport to be postulates about the observable universe and its contents, but frequently fail to possess the necessary connections required to convert that posture into something other than a facade.

Having devoted much of this post to ideas, it is time to devote some of this post to persons, and to remind anyone unaware of the relevant concept, of the distinction between persons and ideas. Ideas are discardable entities, whilst persons most assuredly are not. This does not mean that persons whose ideas are in error are to be allowed to protect those errors from scrutiny. You can infer robustly from all of the foregoing, that I regard adherence to mythology as one of those errors deserving of ruthless scrutiny.

I would like to know why some Athiests [sic] seem to hate followers of Jesus. (Not saying everyone feels this way).

At this point, some more elementary concepts need to be presented.

What is actually regarded with contempt by many here, myself included, is not the persons themselves, unless those persons present evidence of being malicious by intent. Much more frequently, what is regarded with well-deserved contempt, is the malign influence that arises from two sources: [1] the insistence on the part of some adherents of mythology, that the rest of us should be coerced into the same adherence, and [2] the insistence, frequently arising from that expounded in [1], that policy decisions should be coerced into conformity with mythological assertions. Both of these invariably exert malign influence whenever they are allowed to run riot.

Indeed, that is an important historical lesson from Europe, that is applicable here, with respect to the maintenance of a secular society. All too frequently, supernaturalists commit a fundamental error, when railing against secularism. They treat secularism, wholly incorrectly, as some sort of "discrimination" against them, when instead it merely consists of preventing supernaturalists from discriminating against those outside the doctrinal pale. It's not as if European history lacks disturbing lessons to be learned, with respect to the willingness of supernaturalists to exhibit homicidally repressive tendencies in the absence of constraint, and, all too often, said homicidal repression was wrought by rival groups of supernaturalists against each other. As a corollary, supernaturalists are, seemingly paradoxically from a superficial view, the beneficiaries of secularism, because at bottom, secularism consists of two foundational principles:

[1] You are free to adhere to whichever mythology you wish, if such is your choice;

[2] You are not free to coerce others into the same adherence.

Of course, supernaturalists possessing the sense of entitlement that leads to them thinking that said coercion is some sort of "right" that they should be able to exert without restriction, tend to be the most vocal proponents of that fundamental error, forgetting of course that any failure to constrain such tendencies could backfire badly upon them, should a rival group achieve hegemony instead of themselves. But I note the manner in which supernaturalists frequently delude themselves that this will never happen, until it is too late, and they are the ones being thrown into dungeons by sectarian adversaries. It is these maleficent tendencies I have just documented, that attract the ire of myself and others here.

And also, why some Atheists mock, make fun of, and ridicule my beliefs?

Quite simply, another important elementary concept needs to be presented here, all the better to illuminate your understanding.

Mockery, which in its highest form attains the status of satire, has been a tool of choice for spotlighting absurdity since the advent of civilisation itself. Some of the most ruthless and exquisitely skilled practitioners of the art, were to be found in Classical Greek civilisation, the writers of Old Comedy such as Aristophanes being among the most stellar wielders of the requisite literary weapons. When performed with due finesse, mockery punctures pretensions, pricks pomposity and bulldozes bombast, in a manner that is not only highly entertaining, but educational. It has also been a suitably effective weapon for the highlighting of much more sinister failings, such as those arising from tyranny.

Next, another important concept needs to be highlighted. Namely, beliefs have the same status as opinion: they are eminently discardable. The reason for this being, that belief all too frequently consists of treating unsupported assertions uncritically as fact, a process that should be seen to be absurd the moment one recognises this essential aspect thereof. Quite simply, anyone who treats unsupported assertions uncritically as fact, is committing an error of such an elementary nature, that vigorous exposure and highlighting thereof is a public duty for anyone who has regard for the proper rules of discourse.

Feel free to say anything you want....I'm pretty much askin' for it hahaha

You asked, and thus you received.

TheSolidMidget's picture
Just remember. You asked for

Just remember. You asked for it. I'm gonna go all out.

I just find it hard to believe that a virgin woman giving birth to a baby. Unless she got fucked in the ass and that cum dripped out and got in her pussy.

And then there's the talking snake. And how the fuck did Adam & Eve repopulate the earth? I mean. It's not like they fucked their kids... Did they?

Whenever your kind says they've spoken to God and it's like. Well. What's his number? But then that's the wrong thing to say? And why does your kind like to waste their time by telling others how they can and can't live their lives? Like. Doesn't your kind have anything better to do?

Your kind says Jesus is love. But why must that 'love' abuse people until they fall in line like mindless sheep or until that person ends up dead? Just because they refused your religion?

If the bible told you to jump off a cliff. Would you? And if money is the root of all evil. Why does the church want it?

Joke time. What type of choirboys do priests like? A-Minor *Rim shot*
Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.