Q: how should I answer a critic who accuses me of needing a “sky daddy” when I express Christian faith?
When someone accuses you of needing a “sky daddy” in response to your expression of Christian faith, they are likely using this dismissive language to imply that faith in God is irrational, immature, or a psychological crutch. You can respond in a few different ways depending on your approach, tone, and the nature of the conversation.
1. Engage Thoughtfully with the Criticism
A thoughtful and calm response can help reframe the conversation and demonstrate that your faith is based on reason, experience, and reflection, rather than blind dependence.
- Example: “I understand that you may view belief in God that way, but for many people, including myself, faith is based on more than just emotional need. Christianity has a rich intellectual tradition, involving rigorous philosophical thought on questions of existence, morality, and purpose. Thinkers like Augustine, Aquinas, and more recently C.S. Lewis or Alvin Plantinga offer sophisticated reasons for belief in God that go beyond a ‘crutch.’ I’d be happy to discuss that further if you’re open to it.”
This response shows that faith is not merely emotional or irrational, but can be defended intellectually. It also demonstrates the type of gentle and respectful approach that we should be taking with one another (1 Peter 3:15). It is ignoring the slight.
2. Redirect the Conversation to Mutual Respect
If the critique feels more like a personal attack than a constructive conversation, it may be helpful to remind the critic of the importance of respectful dialogue.
- Example: “I get that we might have different beliefs, but dismissing mine in a way that belittles them doesn’t lead to productive conversation. I’m happy to discuss faith and the reasons behind it, but mutual respect is key for that kind of dialogue.”
This approach affirms your belief while holding the conversation to a higher standard of mutual respect. This approach is a slight affront, in that it does not ignore the slight, but points it out as a fault with the critic. They may respond by doubling down on their insulting behavior, by abandoning the conversation, or by actually reengaging respectfully.
3. Acknowledge the Emotional Aspect of Faith
Sometimes acknowledging the emotional aspect of faith can be a powerful way to respond without retreating from the intellectual side.
- Example: “Yes, faith does give me comfort, but it’s not about inventing a ‘sky daddy’ to feel better. Faith engages both my mind and my emotions, and Christianity provides deep answers to both intellectual questions and the human need for meaning, hope, and love.”
This response accepts that faith does offer emotional support but places it within a broader context of rational belief. This can be a very disarming, and non-defensive approach. It not only admits the emotional comfort factor in faith, it turns it into a good thing by explaining that it meets a real human need. It also acknowledges, however, that faith is much more than just emotional comfort, but it also warranted by reason and evidences.
4. Ask a Clarifying Question
Sometimes, the best way to shift a conversation is by asking a question that clarifies their intent or encourages deeper thinking.
Example: “What makes you describe God in that way? Do you think belief in a higher power is inherently irrational?”
This question invites them to reflect on their own assumptions, potentially opening up space for a more respectful conversation. This is similar to approach #2 above, which gently points out the critic’s perhaps poor motives or methods. But rather than calling them disrespectful, it tries to get them to either expose their reasons, or bail out. Devilishly clever if you ask me.
5. Answer a Fool According to His Folly
Proverbs has an interesting passage that seems to give two contradictory pieces of advice when facing a mocker.
Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him.
Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes. (Proverbs 26:4-5)
This offers us one extra approach. The points above fall in the category of NOT answering a fool in the same manner as he has addressed you. But what if all of your efforts to be gentle and respectful are failing? We have to choose an exit strategy from wasting too much time on people who are not ready to engage maturely.
One is to just not answer them. But the other is to answer them in kind. Now don’t get me wrong , I know the admonition 1 Peter 3:9:
Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.
So in light of this, how do we answer a fool “according to his folly” without returning insult for insult? With winsome humor, or a similar backwards complement.
- Example 1: “Not only do I appreciate a sky daddy, I appreciate your reminder of what is important – a relationship with God as father, rather than dead religion that doesn’t make people kind.”
- Example 2: “I have read that one major cause of atheism is a bad relationship with one’s father, since psychology seems to indicate that we perceive God as we have been conditioned with our own parents. A sky daddy seems like something an atheist could use.”
- Example 3: “You don’t need a sky daddy? Were you raised by wolves or something?”
- Example 4: “I find a sky daddy is better than being a human orphan in a difficult world.”
- Example 5: “Sky Daddy sounds like a great name for a band. But not for genuine and mature faith.”
- Example 6: “Sky Daddy? Never heard that one before. I feel so small now, do you feel larger?”
Anyway, you get it. Sometimes fools need gentle pushback, a little boundary definition, where we acknowledge that they are interacting on an immature level, and we are capable of such foolishness too, but choose not to engage unserious people.