How to talk about God without offending believers？

Post Reply New Topic

Both are a ruse / distraction. It's creation vs evolution, left vs right, conservative vs liberal. It's hegelian dialectic, divide and conquer. Jesuit stuff...

No actually. The origin of life and it's current diversity has an answer, and that answer isn't in the bible (nor any other old book of legends and myths).

Dismissing the entire conversation about the origins of life as "Jesuit stuff" contributes to making you look like you believe a lot of conspiratorial nonsense about the Catholic church, which doesn't exactly contribute positively to your credibility.

Conspiracy? Like Castratos, the Crusades, literally contradicting half the Bible... all the quotes from famous people proclaiming their greatest enemies are the Jesuits of Rome... it seems to me your reply is pure projection...

Yes, Catholics have done a lot of horrific stuff historically but so have many other denominations of Christianity.

Yes thats my understanding. Or was.
You dont make a statue of God...because you will get lured into idolatry. And as you said it would limit and distort you view of the almighty.

But the actual commandments says "no graven images of any thing in heaven, on earth, or in the sea". So you cant even depict kings, or have selfies, or draw fish even. Go figure.

I don't share your fixation on the Catholic church and unproven conspiracies. You'll find more common ground with Fnord on that topic.

I just spoke with ChatGPT and received many answers to my questions. I realize that the Old Testament sets out all the ideal behaviors, encouraging people to do good. In the New Testament, however, Jesus initiated reforms, instructing people to defend themselves while also compromising the perfection of moral principles.
I completely understand the difficulties faced by believers.This makes me feel heavy-hearted, recalling the less-than-a-hundred-year history of my country. Who would still quote Mao Zedong's quotations to oppose wars in the new world?

Whoever wrote that commandment seems to have been alluding to their wish that their deity was to be seen by the masses as the most important thing in their lives. A good way to increase control over people, if they'll believe you.

As for the original question, I don't think it's possible for a secular person to talk candidly about God to believers without some risk of offense, though it depends on the person and hopefully to a degree on the nature of the discussion. But if they start it by talking about God as though he exists as an absolute fact, I don't see they have much grounds for complaint if you cast doubt on their assertions, though it might not do any good.

hmmm... bad things happening to good people is in itself not bullet-proof evidence that god is absent. some would say that those unfortunates that got screwed over in and by life, entered into a life-contract before their present incarnations, to experience/expiate negative karma.

No, it's just proof that any god can't possess the four omnis ascribed to some gods.

I think the story of Job was concocted to deal with the "how come he lets bad things happen to good people" question. Apparently we're all too stupid to see the big picture.

Isn't it interesting that no one ever worries about offending atheists? Maybe it's because we are the grown ups in the room who indulge and are patient with the believers as we would indulge children and their fantasies. The fantasies of children and fully grown children can't offend us, because they are nonsense, and they are just very tiresome.

100%.

Atheists get to walk on eggshells to avoid causing offence while also never getting to expect that their perspective will be treated so delicately.

The emperor has no clothes, but we're rude, selfish a**holes for pointing this out. It seems as though we're supposed to just admire their majesty or at most politely discuss which of the emperor's outfits we're most fond of.

Someone uses their imaginary friend as an excuse to deny others rights and no one bats an eye.
Tell that person their imaginary friend is make-believe and not an excuse to deny other people's rights and everyone loses their minds.

The USSR forced atheism on its people under threat of imprisonment or death and had many churches destroyed.

Even an atheist society has it's flaws.

Perhaps, in general, atheists are less likely to get offended. Some people get really attached to their imaginary friends. I can relate in a way. I liked the imaginary friend I had when I was 5.

With that being said, it bothers me when people tell others, including myself, that we will go to Hell for disbelief. It's a personal attack. I don't think that Hell is okay for even the worst people who ever lived. The idea of people being tortured for eternity is appalling and not something that any sane, loving deity would endorse. I wouldn't even want my abusers to go to Hell.

ANYWAY, I also don't like being lumped in with those who commit atrocities or who cause real harm to other people.

It gets into thought-crime territory.

My imaginary friend of choice is a humanity-hating demoness whose origins can be traced all the way back to pre-Abrahamic mythology and yet she has survived the test of time not only because of Judiasm and to a much lesser degree Christiainity but she has also been reinvented and made famous again by pop culture and through the neopagan movement which has transformed her into a feminist icon.

Personally I don't see her as "feminist", I see her as purely misanthropic. In other words she hates humanity as much as I do.


Buuut I don't try to force people to worship her the way Christians do with their God. I do however wish that the people who claim to work with Lilith in neopaganism would at least do the actual research into who and what she is...