language for gods and atheists
Is it rude or silly to talk about invisible sky fairies? I’ve just read a comment-disabled post that takes issue with atheists attempting to ridicule Christian beliefs by using inaccurate metaphors. The author suggests:
there’s nothing obviously ridiculous about believing in a powerful, immaterial being who can effect real changes in the physical universe and is aware of its current states and transformations; but there is something obviously ridiculous in believing in a “sky-wizard.”
Of course, if I’d been able to comment, I would have felt compelled to point out that there is something ridiculous about believing in the powerful, immaterial being of your culture while not believing in the powerful, immaterial beings of every other culture. There’s something just faintly ridiculous about believing in anything in another dimension that no-one can demonstrate exists, especially when there’s a rational explanation for the urge to be drawn to any random supernatural stories. I personally think ‘sky fairy’ and ‘invisible sky wizard’ are lovely ways to view any potential deity.
But I was just wondering if, to be fair, we should accept some more colourful descriptions for rhetorical affect about atheists. Any suggestions?
Not sure i follow. Are you asking for derogatory phrases to use against atheists, or more cutting turn of words to use to describe magical talking (invisible) sky lizards?
LikeLike
Well, not necessarily derogatory, but colourful and fun phrases. I like the idea of sky fairies and feel disappointment my lack of belief system can’t be expressed in similar terms. Unsuperstitious naked ape?
LikeLike
Ah, turning the gun on ourselves, huh? OK then, it’s not new but i’ve always been fond of Heathens. It’s a funny word, has all the right syllables and reminds me of Dylan Moran. Heretics is also good, but also not new. This isn’t easy. Noel uses Laughing Ape, which I like.
LikeLike
Yes, laughing ape is nice, but it can be used to describe any human, regardless of beliefs. I’m confident this exercise has demonstrated that you can’t ridicule logic …
LikeLike
I agree with John, not 100% sure of your point (not a fault of yours, I think I’m just misreading) – I guess, in the end, we can call each other whatever we want, as long as it doesn’t have any serious threatening or harming intention. We should let people believe in what they want to believe in and leave it at that, even if we wish to engage in intellectual discourse.
LikeLike
I was just looking for suggestions of more imaginative labels for atheists – so that the Christians feel the fun descriptions aren’t reserved only for them. I guess there’s nothing harmful in ‘sky wizard’, so it passes your standards! 🙂
LikeLike
I’m a lil confused as well
LikeLike
Oh dear, everyone’s confused! Do you have any suggestions for a more colourful description of atheists or atheism?
LikeLike
If I understand you, I often make use of celestial/ cosmic dictator
LikeLike
I like that! I wonder if the ‘sky wizard’ objector would accept that – it seems accurate even from a Christian’s understanding. However, I was looking more for alternative ways to describe atheists or atheism, as I couldn’t think of any.
LikeLike
Ah, I see. I would have to think of one
LikeLike
Oh please – don’t drag the fairies into this – they will be extremely pissed off.
Honestly my best advice would be to stay away, and not get dragged into nonsense. The other day I ignored this advice and commented on an abortion case in Ireland. Within a few hours a venomous idiot was telling me he hoped someone I loved was murdered so I would know how it felt, followed by the remark that I should go kill some babies. Remember what you’re dealing with and don’t take the bait. 🙂
LikeLike
Oh my goodness! I haven’t yet encountered nuttiness quite on that scale, even on abortion posts.I must admit though, when I have the time, I do really enjoy getting into discussions like that. It’s fascinating what other people think.
LikeLike
Check out this nuttiness…
🙂
LikeLike
A perfect example of fascinating opinions!
LikeLike
This same person has informed me they are trying to figure out how to take me to the “rapture”, but that it hinges on me changing my opinion of Obama. Holy crap 🙂
LikeLike
That is classic! I’m imagining a holy sky fairy sitting on cloud shouting down instructions to her followers about the EVILNESS of Obama. It’s the only way to account for these opinions.
LikeLike
I know! Bat shit crazy lunacy. My mother knows a woman who is a physics professor at a university. She belongs to some crazy Church of God off shoot and believes Obama is the anti-Christ.It blows my mind – and yes I confess, I too enjoy dabbling in crazy despite my advice to the contrary 🙂
LikeLike
I went to comment on this post but, indeed, comments were disabled. Some people find it difficult to accept what others think.
The premise is ridiculous, that if you paint a concept with a different color, then it should be understood differently. Sorry, but no matter how you paint a Ford Pinto, it’s still a Ford Pinto.
My issue was in how, after dismissing sky-wizardry, he depicted God as some “father” watching over the world and his people, dragging the gender question into the realm of the supernatural; all the while perpetuating the fabled — religiously-prompted — hierarchy of genders.
Think he could have thought of God as a mother watching over the world and her children?
LikeLike
“Some people find it difficult to accept what others think.”
Censorship is based on the fear that other ideas might be true, and that one’s own might be false. However, if you can defend your beliefs with reasonable arguments, why being afraid of the other? If you cannot defend your beliefs with reasonable argument, you should question the validity of those beliefs.
LikeLike
Exactly, s/he rejected sky-wizardry then embellished on an equally ridiculous description of the deity. I also thought it odd that invisibility was objected to. If an object is here and I can’t see it, it’s clearly invisible.
I can’t quite get my head round people who want to publish their thoughts on public forums and refuse any feedback. But in some respects it’s much more bizarre when people publicly publish something then moderate comments, and hold back those they don’t like. People believe in free speech but do enjoy their own forms of censorship.
LikeLike
The spirit of reclaiming is abroad. I even heard of people reclaiming the word “Paki”- you are a “Scot”, not a “Scotlander”, so why not Paki? I am a Tranny though I am not terribly happy with others using the word, and a Queer. In that spirit I am a Jesusfreak and a God-botherer- even a Bible-basher, more posts on the Bible coming up. We put it about that the word “Quaker” was originally a derisive insult, though we adopted it quickly enough. Sorry, I can’t think of an offensive term for “atheist”- if you want to join the fun, join the Faith!
LikeLike
Labels are interesting. I used to work with a red-headed girl who thought ‘ginger’ was an offensive word, and refused to let me describe myself as ginger in her company. I guess our understanding of labels depend on the attitude of people when they use a certain word. I shall indeed consider becoming religious so that I can tell people with pride that I believe in an almighty sky wizard. (Honestly, I don’t see what the problem is, it makes Christianity sound much more interesting!)
LikeLike
The point of reclaiming is that the small boy who used to shout “Tranny” at me, did so to wound, and reclaiming means “names shall never hurt me”.
And- the first person to isolate oxygen called it “dephlogisticated air”. That we misdescribe God, does not mean God does not exist.
LikeLike
I can understand the importance of reclaiming labels, and also that other people still shouldn’t use them. If your god existed, or any other deity for that matter, I doubt they could be explained by any human description. Would that not be the nature of something outside of our realm of understanding?
LikeLike
The most colourful term for an atheist I can think of that should really piss off the Silly People would be
Achristian.
That should make a few blood pressures rise!
”Yeah! Hell I’m just a god ole Achristian.”
LikeLike
Hmm, I wasn’t really looking for a way to piss off Christians, but it’s a nice suggestion anyway. I wonder if there’s a fun way to frame atheism in a way that can make atheists all stroppy and declare it’s misrepresentation.
LikeLike
Ah, see where you’re heading. I shall give it some thought henceforth forthwith.
LikeLike
Pingback: Instant Pen Pals – The wonder of the internet. | A Tale Unfolds