Before we begin, let me say I'm pleasantly surprised at the quality of discourse here. I'm not accustomed to internet debates on this topic going so well 
Now, as an idiomatic construct, I guess it's fine. Einstein famously referred to the universe as god, while not actually invoking a magical man in the sky.
Not an original idea, but it was original to me at the time. And it is indicative of a similar misunderstanding of the natural world. Things that appear parallel on the surface commonly have massively different traits otherwise that ruin the analogy. Consider that male and female are not even universal concepts in biology, and among all the species that *do* have males and females, the concepts of masculine and feminine vary as well. Female spiders are far larger than their male counterparts, for example.
So in short, why are so many atheists so rude about this stuff? I think they're bitter and angry about their experiences, and they're lashing out. That doesn't excuse their behavior, of course. Still, I think it's funny when Christians complain about persecution. From an Atheist's perspective, that's like telling a poor African child that you're starving.
EDIT: So what I'm saying is that it might not so much be stirring up trouble as thoughtlessness.
There are definitely some very.... spirited... atheists out there. I'll have more on that later in response to another thing you said.Mako SOLDIER said:
I don't want to give the wrong impression, here. I *do* think belief in God is silly and irrational. That doesn't mean I think that *people* who believe in God are silly or irrational, only that they hold at least one silly and irrational belief. In the interests of politeness and respect, I don't generally go around telling people this.
Allow me to bring it into parity, then. What if I told you that *God* would end the world tomorrow? Then all your fancy science is meaningless
It's, ultimately, wild speculation to say that some intelligent force is behind the universe. So I don't see the two statements as all that different, particularly when I invoke a supernatural cause for tomorrow's world ending event. But this is fundamentally the difference, I think, between a religious person and a non-religious person. The religious person thinks this stuff sounds reasonable. I suspect, it's because it's something they want to believe. Human beings like to think that things have meaning and a purpose, so speculation that the universe has meaning and purpose given by an intelligent creator is appealing.
There are, but they either aren't applying scientific thinking to their religious beliefs or they are misapplying it. An atheist shows a willingness to reject a prevailing cultural belief in the face of logic and reason (there are some atheists who reject it for other reasons, such as the aforementioned Problem of Evil or even just general rebelliousness, but see earlier when I said it was only a correlation). Anyway, the ability to reject a belief in the face of evidence, solid mathematics, or compelling reasoning is critical to scientific thinking.
Personally, I don't see the point. Either the "god" of pantheism is just a meaningless word or an unnecessary middle man. I had a friend who said he felt god was the laws of physics and the physical world. I asked him why he felt that there needed to be a god at all. Do the laws of physics have a will or is it that they just *are*? If the latter, what's the point in invoking god? It's just a word substitution at that point, because it doesn't carry with it any of the other expectations of the supernatural that one might have.
Now, as an idiomatic construct, I guess it's fine. Einstein famously referred to the universe as god, while not actually invoking a magical man in the sky.
When I was a kid, I had the thought that planets revolved around the sun much like electrons in an atom, so maybe the solar system is just an atom in a much larger object.
Not an original idea, but it was original to me at the time. And it is indicative of a similar misunderstanding of the natural world. Things that appear parallel on the surface commonly have massively different traits otherwise that ruin the analogy. Consider that male and female are not even universal concepts in biology, and among all the species that *do* have males and females, the concepts of masculine and feminine vary as well. Female spiders are far larger than their male counterparts, for example.
Yes and no. Yes, those people aren't moving their goalposts, but that's partly because they don't have to. The "greater power/consciousness" variety of belief is making no testable predictions, so it already enjoys "unfalsifiable" status.
My apologies. This is a pet peeve of mine and I commonly nitpick on this point. The difference is there, but it's a semantic difference, and I'm really picky sometimes about word choice. To me, "why" suggests purpose and meaning where "how" is purely mechanical. Most people use them interchangeably and aren't exactly confusing the two.
Earlier I mentioned I'd talk about why I think there are some very spirited atheists out there, and I think I can talk from personal experience on this one. I was raised Christian and began to reject my faith at around age 12. I was the only atheist I knew and I felt out of place in the small town in which I lived. My mother was very upset about my decision and virtually terrorized me over it, accusing me of rejecting her by rejecting her faith and essentially telling me that I was risking hell. I developed a tough skin about it back then and often came on very strong in religious debates, largely out of reaction to perceived persecution from the religiously minded. I was bitter that my opinions were disrespected and that I was disrespected for having them (have you read The God Delusion? Dawkins talks about a poll where 51% of Americans said they would not vote for a qualified atheist for political office). Atheism is demonized in this country, and atheists are seen in a very negative light. Today, I sit here, 30 years old, typing this post, far more mellow than I was in those days, far more at peace with the notion of religion, and yet, as a rule, I still don't tell people I'm an atheist (unless I'm doing so anonymously, like I am here).
So in short, why are so many atheists so rude about this stuff? I think they're bitter and angry about their experiences, and they're lashing out. That doesn't excuse their behavior, of course. Still, I think it's funny when Christians complain about persecution. From an Atheist's perspective, that's like telling a poor African child that you're starving.
Describing Jesus as a fictional character is no more an insult or a jibe than describing Futurama's Nixon as a fictional character. Both are (probably) based on real people, both have fictional elements, and the atheist doesn't have any particular reason to treat them differently. Believers are often offended by disrespect toward Jesus, but this is something that an atheist doesn't necessarily think much about.
EDIT: So what I'm saying is that it might not so much be stirring up trouble as thoughtlessness.
