This Rabbi Says Atheists Make These 3 Mistakes – Do You Agree?

This Rabbi Says Atheists Make These 3 Mistakes – Do You Agree? May 11, 2018

Shalom, heretics! So, there’s a Rabbi, a priest and a Mormon blogger at HuffPost. I know that sounds like the beginning of a joke, but it’s the truth. Often, the triumvirate of meshugaas write pieces that conflict with all rational thought, and today we’re going to look at one such post.

This one is written by the Rabbi, and he wants us to know about three mistakes atheists often make. I know, you’re thinking, what a kibitzer! but before you drop your dreidel, let’s hear the fella out.

Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie begins his schpiel by letting us know how much being wrong bores him:

The God Wars mostly bore me. In my younger days I enjoyed, at least for a while, the intellectual back-and-forth of the God debates. For me, these exchanges had a game-like quality, and it was fun to play the game.

Funny, because for me, “The God Wars” refers to something entirely different, much more firey, and more killy and it begins with Israel and ends with Palestine. It’s covered in children’s blood and the brutal, undeniable fact that your schmuck god ain’t there. That’s “The God Wars”. But perfectly fine for you to consider debating atheists a war. That doesn’t belittle the real wars fought over god at all… I could seriously just plotz.

When Richard Dawkins claims that biology and evolution demonstrate that God does not exist, I must take notice, even if his arguments do not work for me.

Feh! As much chutzpah as you imagine you might have saying that, you look like a shmendrik. Science doesn’t care whether the arguments work for you. They are still facts. These aren’t Dawkins’ arguments, so much as they are his knowledge based on centuries of accumulated scientific study and discovery. So, they don’t work for you? You can deny findings discovered in repeated controlled experiments and through observation all you want, but that doesn’t actually lessen their factuality. It just makes you a delusional goofball.

Eric the friendly Rabbi finishes up his kvetshy intro to this triad of infidel errors, by letting us know that these mistakes make us atheists sound defensive and desperate. This is, of course, a perfect exercise in projection. We say facts, and we are defensive and desperate. You say wild guesses based on zero evidence, and it’s Rabbinic wisdom. Gotcha. Oy Vey!

So, what are these mistakes we make, according to Mr. Yoffie? Let’s take a look:

1. They dismiss, often with contempt, the religious experience of other people.

Yes, of course we do. If we did not dismiss all of it, we would have to draw a line somewhere, wouldn’t we? Which religious experiences should be respected and which should not? Who determines where that line is drawn? There have been plenty of people in history who have clearly lost their minds in the throes of what they believe is some deep, religious experiences. Shall we look at a few examples?

Dora Tejada – Suffocated her 3-year-old daughter because God told her to. She shoved a flower down the tiny child’s throat, to exorcise the devil.

Boyce Singleton Jr. – Believed God ordered him to kill his girlfriend.

Thomas Hammer – Compelled by a higher power to attack a kid on a skateboard.

Victoria Soliz – Tried to drown her son in a puddle because Jesus told her.

Levi Daniel Staver – Archangel Michael told him to stab his grandmother.

Rachel Armstrong – Beat her grandmother because she thought she was possessed.

Tammi Estep – Killed her husband because Jesus and Mary told her he was Satan’s spawn.

Marshall Applewhite – Convinced 39 people to take their own lives so they could party on Hale-Bopp.

Robert Pickton – Quite possibly the most prolific serial killer in all of modern history, asserted that he was put on Earth to rid people of their evil ways. Some who worked on his case estimate he may have killed upwards of 150 women.

This list is, of course, just a tiny sampling of all the people in history who have committed heinous acts because they had a religious experience. So where do we draw the line? Do we draw the line at violence? Conflicts in the Middle East certainly don’t reflect that notion. Should we draw the line at mutilation? Nope, that would put a wrench in the works for your next bris, wouldn’t it? Should we draw the line at discrimination? It doesn’t appear that the homophobic Christian right agrees with that. Do we draw the line at murder? Hatred? Torture? Where?

Let me take a stab at it: we’re supposed to draw the line at precisely the spot you tell us to, based on absolute bupkes, right? Or maybe it’s based on a tickle in your tuchus? Am I understanding correctly? Before you reach for your Torah, let me remind you of the story of Abraham, so eagerly willing to sacrifice his own son because God said so.

So, yes, Rabbi ridiculous, I will dismiss, with absolute and utmost contempt, the religious experiences of others because I have a moral code that doesn’t stand for violence, murder, discrimination or mutilation and your own holy book doesn’t even know where to draw the line.

2. They assert that since there are no valid religions but that religions do good things, the task of smart people is to create a religion without God — or, in other words, a religion without religion.

Maybe a handful of slower-thinking atheists assert such nonsense, but I am firmly with Hitch on his stance that religion poisons everything and every good thing done in the name of a religion can just as easily be done without religion. Lest we forget Hitchen’s challenge:

Christopher Hitchens


3. They see the world of belief in black and white, either/or terms.

I may be too goyish for you, but that ain’t kosher, buddy. You’re confusing seeing the world of belief as black and white, with having absolutely no use for the world of belief at all. There are plenty of knowable things out there that lead to a solid moral code. There exists plenty of observable phenomena in our world and the cosmos that lead to awe anchored in science and curiosity and wonder. We simply have no use for belief. We have reality on our side.

Rabbi, you appear to cling to the idea that these are mistakes so as to further your delusion about a magical man in the sky who sets all the rules. The thing is, none of these points applies to all atheists, just like not all Jewish people like to nosh gefilte fish. Your assertion that you are bored by these debates on the existence of God is a copout; the reality is you don’t have the chutzpah to address what we’re really saying and instead choose to argue against these cockamamie straw men. You might as well be arguing against a drek.

Next time you engage in a “God War”, my little kolboynick, I want you to keep these things I’ve said in mind because honestly, Rabbi, you sound rather desperate and perhaps even a little defensive.

Mazel Tov.


"In the end, don't they all mean the same things? But in a moment of ..."

When To Keep Your Atheism To ..."
"After our father died many years ago, my sister said to me that the only ..."

When To Keep Your Atheism To ..."
"Thanks so much!My path out of religion took a lengthy detour into the New Age ..."

When To Keep Your Atheism To ..."
"Agreed with your last.That's a situation calling for playing Tim Minchin's "The Pope Song" over ..."

When To Keep Your Atheism To ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • The most hilarious part is that all three of his points are precisely the hallmarks of religions. So even if atheism were “guilty” of such behavior, pointing it out would do nothing to make religions look more appealing. They’ve been doing the exact same things for centuries and centuries.

  • Michael Neville

    Rabbi, you’re mistaken about what Dawkins claimed. He did not claim that biology and evolution demonstrate that God does not exist. Rather he said that nothing in science shows any need for gods. I’m sure the rabbi believes that his favorite pet god created the universe but there’s nothing in cosmology which requires any gods for the universe to happen. Cosmologists can describe the universe after Planck Time, 1X10^-43 seconds (that’s a decimal point followed by 42 zeroes and a 1) after the universe started. That’s an awfully tiny gap to squeeze a god into.

  • Otto

    1) I don’t dismiss the experience, I certainly believe they had an experience. I dismiss what the experiences are attributed to. As is pointed out here, until we can differentiate between real religious experiences and false religious experiences I have no idea why we should be expected to think any of them are actually what they are claimed to be.

    2) I think he is being disingenuous and vague to the point that he thinks any worldview constitutes a religion, it looks like an attempt to draw his target so big he can claim he hit it.

    3) Actually I see the world of god belief to be so completely disparate that it becomes absurd.


    There is no horror that cannot be, and has not been, justified in the name of God, religion, and morality. As it says in the Christopher Hitchens quote, there is no good thing that could only be done in the name of god, by religious persons, for religious reasons.

  • wolfypuppy

    The black-white comment is so weird, because it’s religion, particularly Christianity, that teaches absolute truth. They’re the ones who can’t handle grey areas, context, change over time. You’re either 100% sinner and doomed to hell or 100% angel and on the way to glory. Here’s a quote I found on the blog Christianmomthoughts: “The existence of absolute truth is a necessary foundation of Christianity.” She goes on to rail against “tolerance” and relative truth and how Christianity is One True Faith because of Jesus. I don’t know about Jews–they have a healthy tradition of argument. Imo, conservatives of all stripes need to see a therapist to learn about personal responsibility vs. projection. (Whose news is fake?)

  • wolfypuppy

    Eww! I just read the comments on Christianmom. One man comments: “That is why Nancy Pearcey’s book is called “Total Truth” and why Simon Wiesenthal (bless his heart) got it terribly and tragically wrong when he named his Holocaust museum, the “Museum of Tolerance”” and Christian mom replies “Oh the irony. That is indeed a tragic name.” ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Barf!

  • ThaneOfDrones

    It is very helpful towards a meaningful debate to define your terms first, or else it becomes unclear what you are arguing about.

    If you define “God” as someone who created the entire universe in 6 days, 6000 years ago, then indeed science has proven that your God does not exist.

    If you define “God” as someone who flooded the entire world, killing everybody except one inbred family and a boat-load of animals, then indeed science has proven that your God does not exist.

  • ThaneOfDrones

    This gomer has incontrovertible evidence:

    The faith of the atheist faithful
    In my case, there is concrete evidence that God intervened in my life. I won’t get into the details except to say it is fact.

    See? It’s a fact. You can’t argue with that.

  • John Milligan

    For point one you can also go to a Hitchens quote: That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

  • Yeah, I don’t understand this approach. Like the age-old claim that it takes more faith to be an atheist – are they saying there is something wrong with faith?

  • Itty bitty god?

  • Agreed on all three points.

  • Excellent point!

  • Yes! Exactly and well said!

  • Well, I’m sold!

  • That’s pretty much it, isn’t it? He had such a way of putting it succinctly.

  • Anat

    When Richard Dawkins was a Christian believer he also had religious experiences, including visions of angels. All it shows is how culture influences one’s psychology. Also, I don’t think the Rabbi above even understands what Dawkins’ argument regarding evolution and god(s) even was. Dawkins claim is that the theory of evolution provides a naturalistic explanation to the appearance of design in the natural world. One could always come up with some kind of convoluted story about a god that somehow manages to not contradict scientific evidence. Such a god wouldn’t be anything like the traditional god(s)/ess(es) of commonly known religions.

  • John Milligan

    Yes he did. He was somewhat misguided on the whole Iraq War, Pt. 1 thing but nailed it on a lot of other things.

  • This makes me wonder if we’ve seen the last god invented or if there will be more in the future.

  • Agreed.

  • MystiqueLady

    From one schitza to another — You Go, Goya!

  • Hey, this:

    “1. They dismiss, often with contempt, the religious experience of other people.”

    I don’t think that they’re experience is fake.

    I certainly don’t think anything as savage and brutal as the Abrahamic religions are fake.

    GOD–no, that motherfucker is fake.

  • SeeingClearly

    As Neil Degrasse Tyson says (I’ll paraphrase) about the “god of the gaps” argument, if your god explains only the increasingly smaller amount of phenomena in the world not currently understood by science, pretty soon that god will disappear, drowned by the reality we do understand. I would posit that you are right: soon there will be nothing “supernatural” for a god to explain.

  • Sol III

    which is probably why they’ve switched to claiming their God inspired the scientists and their discoveries; or inspired the good Doctor to study medicine for such a huge portion of his life so he could save the life of that one person…

  • Peter Damian

    I mean come on now!!! You know how we atheists have no morals without the magic invisible sky daddy!!! I mean hey, we eat babies, do blood sacrifices, will slaughter each other on our streets, rape, pillage and murder. Oh wait. I am sorry, Those are theists who do that even with their invisible sky daddy.

    The baby eating part comes directly from their buybull. Their psycho sky daddy made the Jews eat their own children and guess what? He said he is going to have every one eat their children and each other in the dreaded end times.

  • Peter Damian

    I think when this Rabbi had his bris? They cut off his head on his shoulders instead of the head of his dick.

  • SeeingClearly

    Which I would believe…as soon as we hear from ALL those scientists and doctors that anything supernatural had anything to do with the science they discovered or applied. Let’s not hold our collective breaths awaiting that news. Oh, and if it’s that they “heard” the word of a god…I’d need that actual conversation on tape, please.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    “That’s an awfully tiny gap to squeeze a god into.”
    Puny god (;

  • Cozmo the Magician

    That list could go on and on.