Thoughts on the "No atheists in foxholes" argument

[Audie]

How could I be misunderstanding their intent to say that they are arguing for Gods existence when the only times that "argument" (again, I loathe to call it that, because that is NOT what it is) has been presented to me in a personal situation is when I am telling the other person that I don't believe in God? Is that not some lame attempt to try and show me that somewhere deep in the recesses of my crap-filled colon I DO acknowledge God's existence? Isn't that what it is about? How could it not be? Never is the "fox-holes" phrase used with me in a conversation merely about "the powers we turn to when we feel powerless." Never. I've never even had that conversation. So how could I be misconstruing their intent when the argument is about whether or not it is warranted to believe in God? You still haven't explained this. You just keep making your same assertions and telling me what I should think about personal conversations I have had with theists that YOU WERE NOT A PART OF.


Nope. Not right. I don't "turn to God" for anything, no matter how dire the circumstances, or how "out of my hands" the situation. It wouldn't even cross my mind anymore. There was a time when I was "trying things out" perhaps, and I may have requested this or that sign, or asked a question to "God" (whatever the hell that is supposed to be), but I most certainly outgrew it. Especially given those exact same experiences within which NOTHING ANSWERED BACK AND NOTHING HAPPENED. It became all too easy to see that I was, like I truly believe everyone else is, on my own. Save for the actual people in my life, there is nothing out there with my best interests in mind - and I am not so naive to even contemplate that there might be any longer.

And here you are, accusing me of being "smug" when your above paragraphs are you telling me what I, as an atheist, think. But, obviously, you can't see that. Too much "theism" clouding your judgment. Just know that your opinion means absolutely nothing to me. Nothing. In my personal mental Rolodex of who's who - you're in the section unceremoniously headed "Incorrigibles"

Regression such as happens when one is gravely
injured or otherwise stressed is real enough.

The soldier with his leg blown off, say, calling
for his mother has nothing to do with "choosing
a god concept" or being "fair weather". One whose
mind is fogged with religious ideology can of
course see most anything thro' said gauzy veil.

Exploiting the normal response to a tragic and
agonzing situation so as to promote "god" and
make scurrilous claims against the character
and intellect of those who do not "surrender to"
some imaginsry god goes well beyond the faux-
intellectual and deep into the realm of contemptible.

Not that I need to tell you that.

 

[ecco]

It's just a metaphorical figure of speech: in the moment when life is brought into focus by the proximity of death, the question of whether this is 'all there is' is inevitable.

N O N S E N S E


What makes you believe "the question of whether this is 'all there is'" is inevitable?

Did you get that from any atheist who has faced death, or is that something it makes you feel good to believe?

Speaking for myself, I have calmly considered, "Is this all there is?" and have calmly concluded, "Yes, this is all there is. I'm, OK with that. To think I'm going to change my mind at the last seconds is ludicrous.

 

[ecco]

Actually, as a Christian who believes the Bible is the Word of God, there really are no atheists at all. Many claim to be. But the Bible is clear that all know there is God. (Rom. 1:18-20)

Good-Ole-Rebel

N O N S E N S E

You may need to believe that to salve your ego, but you are very wrong. Many people live very nicely without having to believe in any silly superstitions.

 

[ecco]

They are using it to exemplify the human need for something greater and more powerful than themselves to trust in when we lack sufficient ability to control/contain a significant threat.

More correctly...
They are using it to exemplify the need of superstitious humans for something greater and more powerful than themselves to trust in when they lack sufficient ability to control/contain a significant threat.

 

[ecco]

...
Those smug theists you're referring to are simply pointing out that atheism tends to be a 'fair-weather' choice that's held onto when it's easy,
...

And they are right about that, even if they are being annoyingly smug about it.

N O N S E N S E

Gee, I've had to write N O N S E N S E in response to three different posts now.

Note to theists: Stop pretending you know anything about atheists.

 

[ecco]

RE: GOD

It is if we cannot possibly know one way or the other. As we cannot.

Obviously you are open to the possibility that:

• Atlas is the True God.
• a psychic snowflake is the True God.
• the True God, Allah, dictated the Koran to Muhammed.
• Joseph Smith read God's Golden Tablets.

Why do you list yourself as some kind of Christian?

 

[Audie]

Dunno. Twice I've been in real fear for my life (both times through violence) and I can say two things for certain;
1) God never crossed my mind.
2) My thoughts processes were not entirely rational.

Indeed there have been some studies suggesting overly rational thought in some situations is irrational (in so far as an instinctive reaction is more like to lead to a positive outcome than a rational one).

Twice too for me, and no "god help me".

 

[Audie]

N O N S E N S E

Gee, I've had to write N O N S E N S E in response to three different posts now.

Note to theists: Stop pretending you know anything about atheists.

You are more ladylike than I am.
I tend to say GARBAGE!

You are btw making a request that can
be generalized to

"Quit making things up!"

Isnt that the same as saying "Quit talking!" ?

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

N O N S E N S E

You may need to believe that to salve your ego, but you are very wrong. Many people live very nicely without having to believe in any silly superstitions.

Did I say anything about living nicely? It has nothing to do with ego. I was clear, as a Christian who believes the Bible, there are no atheist's.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Revoltingest]

Did I say anything about living nicely? It has nothing to do with ego. I was clear, as a Christian who believes the Bible, there are no atheist's.

Atheists are so generous.
We believe that you exist too.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Did I say anything about living nicely? It has nothing to do with ego. I was clear, as a Christian who believes the Bible, there are no atheist's.

Good-Ole-Rebel

I believe it does have to do with ego. It's essentially saying that someone with a belief is lying to themselves because they don't 'really believe that.' It would be equally obvious if an atheist said 'There are no theists, just people who try to convince themselves really hard to believe something they know doesn't exist.'

 

[Revoltingest]

I believe it does have to do with ego. It's essentially saying that someone with a belief is lying to themselves because they don't 'really believe that.' It would be equally obvious if an atheist said 'There are no theists, just people who try to convince themselves really hard to believe something they know doesn't exist.'

Reminds me of....
“Faith is believing what you know ain't so.”
― Mark Twain

It's funny, but not something I'd say seriously.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

I believe it does have to do with ego. It's essentially saying that someone with a belief is lying to themselves because they don't 'really believe that.' It would be equally obvious if an atheist said 'There are no theists, just people who try to convince themselves really hard to believe something they know doesn't exist.'

The accusation of 'ego' was against me the Christian. Which is why I said it doesn't have anything to do with ego, just me believing the Bible.

If I understand you right, the ego you are speaking of is on the atheist side. I have never heard an atheist say , I as a Christian don't believe the Bible. I do believe the Bible, which is why I believe (Rom. 1:18-20)

The whole point of the believer is he believes and knows it is true. He doesn't need convincing, he knows and believes.

This brings up a good point though. Perhaps churches should require a lie detector test for those who want to join the church. Let's see if you really believe these things. I don't have any problem with it.

Good-Ole-Reble

 

[ADigitalArtist]

The accusation of 'ego' was against me the Christian. Which is why I said it doesn't have anything to do with ego, just me believing the Bible.

If I understand you right, the ego you are speaking of is on the atheist side. I have never heard an atheist say , I as a Christian don't believe the Bible. I do believe the Bible, which is why I believe (Rom. 1:18-20)

The whole point of the believer is he believes and knows it is true. He doesn't need convincing, he knows and believes.

This brings up a good point though. Perhaps churches should require a lie detector test for those who want to join the church. Let's see if you really believe these things. I don't have any problem with it.

Good-Ole-Reble

Holding off for the moment that not every or even most Christians interpret Rom. 1:18-20 as 'atheists are knowingly lying because they're not really atheists', whether you believe it comes from the bible or not doesn't make it not about ego. If you agree to a text that says you are the most specialist person worthy of love more than any other person I would say it's ego even if you say 'My belief comes from the text.'
And yes, I think both the statements 'atheism isn't real' and 'theism isn't real' are egotistical and inaccurate.

Also, as an aside, polygraphs are notoriously untrustworthy. The Truth About Lie Detectors (aka Polygraph Tests)

 

[Willamena]

N O N S E N S E


What makes you believe "the question of whether this is 'all there is'" is inevitable?

Experience.

Did you get that from any atheist who has faced death, or is that something it makes you feel good to believe?

From the mouth of an atheist.

Speaking for myself, I have calmly considered, "Is this all there is?" and have calmly concluded, "Yes, this is all there is. I'm, OK with that. To think I'm going to change my mind at the last seconds is ludicrous.

Inverted process, though.

 

[firedragon]

One of the popular arguments used by Christians is that "there are no atheists in foxholes." I recall a man in my childhood church who was fond of using this statement. Now, I think it is highly unlikely that this statement is true. While many people probably do call out to a childhood deity in times of personal crisis, I highly doubt that everyone does. But, for the sake of argument, let's suppose the statement is true, and that everyone who is in a foxhole believes in God. How could this possibly be used as a legitimate argument for the existence of God? Do the Christians who are so fond of making this claim really think that a person in a foxhole is in the best frame of mind to rationally weigh the evidence for and against the existence of God and come to a logical decision? If anything, I would think that people are less rational and more driven toward erroneous and superstitious beliefs when their lives are in danger. Thus, if anything, I would say that the "no atheists in foxholes" argument is a better argument against the existence of God then for it, because people in immediate danger are obviously not going to be thinking as carefully about evidence as people who are in an environment where they have time to rationally and calmly consider arguments for and against the existence of God.

I think the world is looking to heckle at people. Everyone is seeking platforms where you have cavalry who will support your thinking when you heckle at others.

 

[Dell]

It doesn't matter if an atheist or believer cries out to God. It's only desperation. "God if you save me I'll quit (name a sin) and go to church and ...." or "Please don't kill me I'll do anything". Pity someone to be in a situation of desperation grasping at anything.

Reality is if you die, everyone one else has to go back to work on time the next day after your funeral. And if you dont die, good for you, you have to be at work on time the next morning.

Just another brick in the wall...

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Aphorisms aren't meant to be taken literally.

It shouldn't be used as an argument for god, against god, or taken as being 'wrong' because it's not literally true that everyone starts to believe in god at this point.

It should just be taken as meaning in times of great stress and uncertainty (i.e where we need a bit of luck) we become more superstitious (which is true).

In the case of the theist in the foxhole, though, it seems they abandon their superstition.

Either that or suddenly an eternity in Heaven becomes such an undesirable prospect that the theist would choose to wallow in mud and - if they're stuck in the foxhole long enough - human excrement to avoid going there as long as possible.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Do you think they ever will be again?

In seriousness? No, of course not.
But in a more playful sense, no, of course not.

Heh.

None of us are rational, not in a complete way, of course. The interesting part is the assumption some people make that rationality is always the best way of approaching things, which is not really the case. Ironic.

 

[PureX]

N O N S E N S E

Gee, I've had to write N O N S E N S E in response to three different posts now.

Note to theists: Stop pretending you know anything about atheists.

Perhaps you should consider this compulsion more closely.