(Theists Only) Why do you think atheists reject the existence of deities?

[Maponos]

I have always been someone who was intensely interested in the occult and supernatural, so the existence of deities was never questioned. It's just something that I've always naturally believed in.

I've been on a journey from becoming a monotheist (Christian) to polytheist, and never once did I ever doubt the existence of the gods. It just does not register in me. It may sound arrogant (or even delusional!) but I can feel that they are real. To me, the gods are just as real as the earth and water around me.

I was watching a movie/documentary called 'The Atheist Delusion' (proselytizing is not something I support), and one question the man asked to the atheists was why they didn't believe in the Christian god. He suggested that it was their fear of responsibility to him. That question seemed rather profound and grounded in a truth they probably don't want to confront.

I also get the feeling from many of them that they don't like the idea of someone/thing greater than them having power over them. It's a typical rebellion in the oldest of mythological cycles (oh, the irony).

So, what does everyone else think?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I have always been someone who was intensely interested in the occult and supernatural, so the existence of deities was never questioned. It's just something that I've always naturally believed in.

I've been on a journey from becoming a monotheist (Christian) to polytheist, and never once did I ever doubt the existence of the gods. It just does not register in me. It may sound arrogant (or even delusional!) but I can feel that they are real. To me, the gods are just as real as the earth and water around me.

I was watching a movie/documentary called 'The Atheist Delusion' (proselytizing is not something I support), and one question the man asked to the atheists was why they didn't believe in the Christian god. He suggested that it was their fear of responsibility to him. That question seemed rather profound and grounded in a truth they probably don't want to confront.

I also get the feeling from many of them that they don't like the idea of someone/thing greater than them having power over them. It's a typical rebellion in the oldest of mythological cycles (oh, the irony).

So, what does everyone else think?

Lack of convincing evidence or convincing arguments in favour of their existence.

 

[Maponos]

Lack of convincing evidence or convincing arguments in favour of their existence.

I think it goes a bit deeper than that, given how strongly many of them react to the existence of deities.

No one goes on a godsless crusade (lol) to spread atheism without deeper feelings to motivate them.

 

[HonestJoe]

I think it goes a bit deeper than that, given how strongly many of them react to the existence of deities.

No one goes on a godsless crusade (lol) to spread atheism without deeper feelings to motivate them.

I know you were asking your question of theists but I have to say that I strongly resent your extremely negative attitude towards anyone who happens to not believe in gods in exactly the same manner in which you describe why you do.

 

[George-ananda]

Why do you think atheists reject the existence of deities?

One reason is the lack of evidence indicating a deity. Another reason is the rejection of their family's traditional beliefs because of perceived practical and theoretical problems.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think it goes a bit deeper than that, given how strongly many of them react to the existence of deities.

No one goes on a godsless crusade (lol) to spread atheism without deeper feelings to motivate them.

Actually, that is not quite true. Those who do "crusade" against deities generally do so because they have seen the terrible potential (and actual) consequences that belief in deities bring about. For example, 9/11, or the Reformation or Counter-Reformation or Inquisition or the deliberate destruction of entire cultures in the name of one belief or another.

The same goes for belief in non-verifiable "-isms" as well. Nazism and Communism and any such doctrinaire twaddle that make proclamations of "truths" that cannot be adequately demonstrated to be true do the same.

Doctrines that must be accepted "on faith" are inevitably awful. The only salvation we humans have is our ability to reason. Sadly, not very many humans are comfortable using it.

 

[Aštra’el]

Doctrines that must be accepted "on faith" are inevitably awful.

There are countless instances of these faith-based doctrines empowering individuals and groups and strengthening their Weltanschauung in ways that amplifies their levels of courage, fortitude, resilience, persistence, morale, and other attributes, helping them become a significantly formidable force in their journey of life.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There are countless instances of these faith-based doctrines empowering individuals and groups and strengthening their Weltanschauung in ways that amplifies their levels of courage, fortitude, resilience, persistence, morale, and other attributes, helping them become a significantly formidable force in their journey of life.

And countless instances in which those same faith-based doctrines -- which you say empowered individuals and groups -- destroyed many, many other individuals and groups. Would you call that a fair exchange? If it makes me feel better to kill you, am I right to do so? Even if it becomes "a significantly formidable force in [my] journey of life?"

 

[Aštra’el]

And countless instances in which those same faith-based doctrines -- which you say empowered individuals and groups -- destroyed many, many other individuals and groups. Would you call that a fair exchange?

Life is not fair; nor should it be.

If it makes me feel better to kill you, am I right to do so? Even if it becomes "a significantly formidable force in [my] journey of life?"

In this particular instance (and in many others), "right" or "wrong" just does not apply.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I have always been someone who was intensely interested in the occult and supernatural, so the existence of deities was never questioned. It's just something that I've always naturally believed in.

I've been on a journey from becoming a monotheist (Christian) to polytheist, and never once did I ever doubt the existence of the gods. It just does not register in me. It may sound arrogant (or even delusional!) but I can feel that they are real. To me, the gods are just as real as the earth and water around me.

I was watching a movie/documentary called 'The Atheist Delusion' (proselytizing is not something I support), and one question the man asked to the atheists was why they didn't believe in the Christian god. He suggested that it was their fear of responsibility to him. That question seemed rather profound and grounded in a truth they probably don't want to confront.

I also get the feeling from many of them that they don't like the idea of someone/thing greater than them having power over them. It's a typical rebellion in the oldest of mythological cycles (oh, the irony).

So, what does everyone else think?

Yes, I agree. Accountability is a big part. I believe in the God of the Bible, and I think that atheists believe as they do, so they can feel confident in disregarding mainly the guidelines on sexual morality.

And 150 years ago, an alternative belief structure that supplants God, that of Common Descent evolution, began to gain support, bolstering their confidence.

That's what they want.

And then, we have the bloodguilty reputation of religion itself. So it really doesn't exert a positive force for good like it should. As a result, many professed religious people don't lead a virtuous life that sets them apart from other people, either. So atheists see no value in it, just hypocrisy.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

God only calls those individuals He chooses. Atheists have not been called and so do not see the truth about God because He has not revealed it to them.

 

[Scuba Pete]

So, what does everyone else think?

Christianity is revealed. Not everyone can see God, just like many people can't see the difference between red and green. I can't see ultra violet or infrared, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

While I'm sure that some see God and simply live in denial, I'm confident most are genuine in their disbelief. That's OK. God is love. God is unconditional love. Those that love have been touched by God, whether they want to admit it or not. Love is God's mark, his fingerprints if you will, on the human soul.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Sorry, but if God marks someone, they know it. When God touches someone that person is forever changed. Those who do not believe have not been touched.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Life is not fair; nor should it be.

Quite correct -- and really a rather spectacular argument against almost every religious belief that I know of.

In this particular instance (and in many others), "right" or "wrong" just does not apply.

I disagree. There are certainly things that happen to us that are neither right nor wrong (this is one of my primary arguments against religion), but I was talking about something that "I" could do to "you," and in that, there is no question in my mind that right and wrong apply. And it is here that I think we, as humans living with, among, for, in spite of or whatever else, of one another, have to act.

And do you know -- at bottom, if you think about it properly, that is the Golden Rule.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Sorry, but if God marks someone, they know it.

Sometimes. God has written eternity in our hearts. People often believe in Love, not realizing that they are also believing in God. Quite often, those who identify themselves as theists drive them away by their action and inaction. How many have been denied faith because some self righteous zealot tells them that God opposes evolution? How many believe that Christians are the most blood thirsty and judgmental people on the face of the earth? Love is universal. God is Love. Only those who know God can love. The more they become like God, the more they can love. If it weren't for the Christians, Christianity would be great.

 

[Aštra’el]

I was talking about something that "I" could do to "you," and in that, there is no question in my mind that right and wrong apply. And it is here that I think we, as humans living with, among, for, in spite of or whatever else, of one another, have to act.

And do you know -- at bottom, if you think about it properly, that is the Golden Rule.

You posed the question:

"If it makes me feel better to kill you, is it right or wrong to do so?"

In this instance, "right" and "wrong" is completely subjective. In my mind, in this instance (and so many other instances) these words do not compute. Some call it being ammoral; I just opt not to delude myself into perceiving everything I approve or dissaprove of as "good" and "evil", or "right" and "wrong", as so many appear to do. Detaching my Weltanschauung from these terms allows for an expanded understanding and appreciation for human Nature and the world around me.

 

[Thief]

Quite correct -- and really a rather spectacular argument against almost every religious belief that I know of.

I disagree. There are certainly things that happen to us that are neither right nor wrong (this is one of my primary arguments against religion), but I was talking about something that "I" could do to "you," and in that, there is no question in my mind that right and wrong apply. And it is here that I think we, as humans living with, among, for, in spite of or whatever else, of one another, have to act.

And do you know -- at bottom, if you think about it properly, that is the Golden Rule.

for clarity.....do unto others as you would have them do unto you

because....

heaven will do unto you as you did unto others...
so will hell

 

[Shaul]

There many reasons why atheists don't accept deities. But I think the majority can be classified as being a matter of convenience. Atheism is simpler. That begs the question, are the best answers simple?

 

[Thief]

There many reasons why atheists don't accept deities. But I think the majority can be classified as being a matter of convenience. Atheism is simpler. That begs the question, are the best answers simple?

no

 

[Shaul]

no

That was a simple answer. So it must not be the best answer, right? ;-)