Interesting . . .
So basically, you’re saying god has to be the god of your bible, and not any of the other millions of religions that have come and gone over many thousands of years? Religion is guilty of precisely what you’re accusing an atheist of believing.
When someone’s in your religion, you tell them exactly what god wants them to do, what to eat, who to mate with, how to behave, etc. Who are you to say whether the bible is godly? Are you god? If someone makes a decision on their own, of what they think is moral and what isn’t, then don’t be claiming divine knowledge on the matter and then accuse someone else of blasphemy. That is just about the most hypocritical statement you could make.
I would first challenge the atheist to demonstrate that there have been, in fact, "millions of religions . . .over many thousands of years? For an alleged rationalist and evidentialist this seems mathematically improbable, to say the least. Otherwise it is just bluster. Another typical atheist tactic is to point to the similarities between religions as evidence that they are nothing more than wish-fulfillment, hopes that are common to ignorant people . . .so which is it? Should we ignore religion because there are so many different takes on reality or because there are so many similarities? Which stick shall we whip Christianity with today?
Thes list of “what to’s . . .” is pure rubbish. Catholicism doesn’t tell you what to eat, although it may prescribe what not to eat at certain times and encourages moderation as opposed to gluttony. Given the health care crisis and the secular push for cheaper access to health insurance, and adding in the health risks and costs of obesity in this nation, whose position is preferable? Catholicism doesn’t tell you who to mate with, just that you should restrict your mating to a monogamous, and married relationship. You can mate with anyone else in the world you choose to, given they are not already married and of the opposite sex; otherwise, “mating” is not even possible . . .copulation perhaps, but not mating, Look at the STD stats, the unwanted pregnancies, the abortion rates, the divorce rates and the social and emotional costs of promiscuity and infidelity, pornography, etc., and ask them for a better practical solution to these social problems than simply pretending that there is no causal link between them.
As for telling people how to behave, ask the atheist if they are against parental supervision; school exams; traffic laws; job qualifications and performance standards. . .etc., etc.
As for asking “who are you to say the bible is godly? Are you god?” I would simply reply . . no but then turn the question back upon them, The atheist is hung on the horns of their own dilemma. In order to “prove” there is no god and that the bible is not inspired the atheist would have to have exhaustive knowledge of everything . . .they would have to claim omniscience. In short, to claim there is no God and that God did not inspire the Bible requires an attribute that belongs only to a Being the atheist claims does not exist. Rubbish , , ,
As to the last . . .I suppose that the atheist is okay with folks making a decision on their own as to what is and is not moral as long as they claim to have no divine knowledge on the issue. In short, they support the right of Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Nero, the Marquis de Sade, Machiavelli and any host of other quacks out there to prescribe and then enforce what is and is not moral as long as they don’t do so in the name of God.
Perhaps, you could tag your remarks with an appeal for them to live up to the atheist ethic of thinking for themselves, and to do so with the prerequisite of actually thinking in the first place.
All my best . . .