Worst Thing Said to You for Being a Non-believer

[Iroscato]

It came up in conversation the other day with a colleague who is pretty much a cultural christian with a dash of belief. She said she found my view that this is the only life you get, and therefore the one you really need to focus on 'sad'. I bit back 4,886 retorts as I have avoided a religious debate in the FleshWorld for years, and would like to keep it that way.

But really, that's the worst I've had. Guess I've been lucky.

[Chad32]

That I have no moral compass, or that there's no meaning in my life. As if my morals are dictated by a book that thinks consentual same sex relations is worse than slavery, or that I need someone else to tell me what value my life has. It's ridiculous.

The meaning of life is often played up as this super deep question that people have been asking themselves since the dawn of time. That's only because they were trying too hard, looking to find one path that fits us as a species.

Why would I get my morals from a collection of books written at a time when people thought killing an innocent animal or child would improve their lot in this life or the next? Or that we should be punished for things we can't control, like our thoughts? I know christians like to gloss over the old testament because that's the jewish part of the bible, or some such, but it's also the first impression we get of this god we're meant to follow, and some christians want us to believe Jesus and Yahweh are the exact same guy anyway. Not to mention the parts of the old testament they like to keep, like the ten more well known commandments, or the stuff about how gays are an abomination. Go back to raping that slave girl you dragged from her home, and forced into marriage, after killing her friends and family, like a normal person.

The idea that the new testament is slightly better than the old is little consolation.

[Pyrrho]

... Imaginary hellfire is a much more serious matter than the physical, psychological, and societal consequences of drug usage to her I suppose.

...

That is because she believes hellfire is real.  If it were real, it would be a more serious matter.  So the relative value she places on the two ideas is correct.  The error is in believing that the imaginary one is real.

I have read several posts in which an atheist states that Christians should not frighten children with stories of hell.  The thing is, if hell were real, it would be the most important thing parents could possibly teach their children to avoid.  So as long as parents believe in hell, they are going to be telling their children about it, because that is what a good parent does.  Good parents try to teach their children about the most serious dangers to avoid.  The only way to stop good parents from teaching their children about hell is to convince the parents that hell is not real.

[drfuzzy]

... Imaginary hellfire is a much more serious matter than the physical, psychological, and societal consequences of drug usage to her I suppose.

...

That is because she believes hellfire is real.  If it were real, it would be a more serious matter.  So the relative value she places on the two ideas is correct.  The error is in believing that the imaginary one is real.

I have read several posts in which an atheist states that Christians should not frighten children with stories of hell.  The thing is, if hell were real, it would be the most important thing parents could possibly teach their children to avoid.  So as long as parents believe in hell, they are going to be telling their children about it, because that is what a good parent does.  Good parents try to teach their children about the most serious dangers to avoid.  The only way to stop good parents from teaching their children about hell is to convince the parents that hell is not real.

Precisely, Pyrrho! It's hard for people who were never brainwashed into Xtianity as children to comprehend, but a lot of Xtians (well, the protestant varieties anyway) believe absolutely that hell is a VERY VERY REAL PLACE.  My mother certainly did: she described proselytizing as "running into a burning building to save someone from burning to death".  She was somewhat of an extreme example - anyone who would brand their children's legs with the tip of her clothes iron to give them a forever warning of what will happen to you if you sin is, well, a bit nuts - but it shows non-believers how deep her belief goes.

[Strider]

That is because she believes hellfire is real.  If it were real, it would be a more serious matter.  So the relative value she places on the two ideas is correct.  The error is in believing that the imaginary one is real.

I have read several posts in which an atheist states that Christians should not frighten children with stories of hell.  The thing is, if hell were real, it would be the most important thing parents could possibly teach their children to avoid.  So as long as parents believe in hell, they are going to be telling their children about it, because that is what a good parent does.  Good parents try to teach their children about the most serious dangers to avoid.  The only way to stop good parents from teaching their children about hell is to convince the parents that hell is not real.

You're absolutely right. If there were a hell and if you actually did go there for not following a specific belief system, it would be the highest priority. And for many, this is just so. I see it as a vicious circle though. How will children eventually become good parents who don't inflict this psychological malady on their own children when they themselves are warned in a quite dramatic fashion of the dangers of hell and the hideous tortures that await sinners, idolators, the unbelievers, and others? Naturally, some will come to realize the truth, but plenty of others will venture ahead thinking that they know the truth.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Hiya Strider, good to see ya again.

Worst thing? Nothing really bad, just "how do you know right from wrong?"

[Pyrrho]

That is because she believes hellfire is real.  If it were real, it would be a more serious matter.  So the relative value she places on the two ideas is correct.  The error is in believing that the imaginary one is real.

I have read several posts in which an atheist states that Christians should not frighten children with stories of hell.  The thing is, if hell were real, it would be the most important thing parents could possibly teach their children to avoid.  So as long as parents believe in hell, they are going to be telling their children about it, because that is what a good parent does.  Good parents try to teach their children about the most serious dangers to avoid.  The only way to stop good parents from teaching their children about hell is to convince the parents that hell is not real.

You're absolutely right. If there were a hell and if you actually did go there for not following a specific belief system, it would be the highest priority. And for many, this is just so. I see it as a vicious circle though. How will children eventually become good parents who don't inflict this psychological malady on their own children when they themselves are warned in a quite dramatic fashion of the dangers of hell and the hideous tortures that await sinners, idolators, the unbelievers, and others? Naturally, some will come to realize the truth, but plenty of others will venture ahead thinking that they know the truth.

People often say that the doctrine of hell gives a motive to not question things.  In a way, that is true.  But it also gives one a motive to question things.  When I was a child, I was a Christian, who was raised to believe in hell.  Avoiding hell seemed to me to be the most important thing I could possibly do.  And since salvation, I was told, depended on what one believed (at least in part), then I wanted to make sure I had the right beliefs.  I knew, as pretty much everyone in the U.S. knows, that there are many kinds of Christians in the U.S.  Since they all disagree with each other, that means that most of them must be wrong.  (Logically, the most Christian denominations that could be totally correct is one.  They could, of course, all be wrong, but it is impossible for two contradictory positions to be correct, so no more than one denomination of Christian could possibly be totally correct.)

Now, how could I be so sure that I was lucky enough to be raised in the right denomination (even if there were a right denomination)?  Most people obviously are not raised in the right denomination (even if there were a right denomination), so the odds would be very much against being so lucky.

Also, although I was told not to question things, I knew that the truth cannot be proven to be false, and that all of the false religions have as a part of them (for good reason) that one ought not question them.  With all of the false religions, not questioning them was the way to keep people believing their falsehoods.  So the idea that one ought not question things really does not make much sense, if the actual goal is to believe the truth and not to keep people believing falsehoods.

With that in mind, I examined my beliefs, to try to make sure I had the right ones.  Screwing it up might mean an eternity in hell, so I was highly motivated to be careful and thorough in my examination.  Doing so, of course, led me to disbelieve Christianity entirely, as there is no way to make it make sense and be coherent and sensible.

As for your question, many people will not figure out the truth of the matter, and will continue to believe in hell.  If they have children, they will teach their children about hell.  So, yes, you are correct, it is a vicious circle.  There is no panacea in the real world for making everything okay.  That, by the way, is one of the reasons one can know that there is not an omniscient, omnipotent, perfectly benevolent God who created the universe.  If there were such a god, the world would be perfect, and there would be no problems to solve.  The excuses that people try to come up with to avoid the problem of evil are all completely fallacious and ridiculous, as an omnipotent being could effortlessly overcome any obstacle and make the world exactly as it wants the world to be.  But people who do not think deeply about the question are often satisfied with something that gives a superficial appearance of explaining away the problem, and so they are not roused from their dogmatic slumber.

[brewer]

Hey Strider.

You already said it. Worst was "You poor thing. That's so sad. I'll be praying for you".

[Minimalist]

Heya! It's great to see you back again

I've not had anything much said to me face to face, the worst of it by far has been on this forum. One of the Christians went ape shit and called all atheists just about every bad thing you could imagine.

Rob, I see you're still around - and quite busy judging by your post count.   I actually didn't even think of insults via forums, chat rooms, etc. If those were to be included, it would break the thread!

Hello. I'm thinking that the believer's lack of self awareness in realizing that god is just an aspect of self causes the godself to be warded off in seclusion and delusion, a fortification from which the most ignorant and asinine commentary sallies forth. 

You can add hateful to those adjectives as well! Ignorance and hatred make for amiable bedfellows.

Welcome back, man.

Your mom has a serious problem in discerning problems.


I suppose the worst I ever heard was the usual "you'll burn in hell" horseshit that the morons trot out when they can't think of anything intelligent to say.

No argument there. "You'll burn in hell" and "I'll pray for you" are on equal footing for me.

Oh, I love it when they say they'll pray for me.  I always reply with "that's fine....I'll think for you."