Religion How does anger at God factor into Atheism?

[ShieldWife]

Hm... there's much truth to be said in that. But do you agree that hating Christianity makes you more likely to become an atheist?

It definitely does. Most people come to their belief system for emotional reasons, not rational ones, then use their intellect to justify those beliefs after the fact. So I’d be willing to bet that most atheists are that way because of emotional reasons, including but not limited to hating Christianity or Christians, or other believers too.

I would also say that most religious people also believe in their religion for emotional reasons.

So I have no doubt hating Christianity (at least in Western nations) makes you more likely to be an atheist.

 

[Abhorsen]

Hm... there's much truth to be said in that. But do you agree that hating Christianity makes you more likely to become an atheist?

I don't know about that. ISIS hates Christianity plenty, and I wouldn't call them atheists, especially not nearby them.

And the original reason for a person's atheism could come from hating a religion, but that doesn't mean that they still do hate religion as a concept. But for the initial push, hating what a religion has done can be a large reason. One of the reasons I stopped liking Catholicism was its sex abuse problem. The reason why I currently don't believe in God is that there is little to no evidence for God. I wouldn't say I hate all religions, but I have contempt for a number of them, based on the religion abusing its followers.

 

[The Name of Love]

And the original reason for a person's atheism could come from hating a religion, but that doesn't mean that they still do hate religion as a concept. But for the initial push, hating what a religion has done can be a large reason. One of the reasons I stopped liking Catholicism was its sex abuse problem. The reason why I currently don't believe in God is that there is little to no evidence for God. I wouldn't say I hate all religions, but I have contempt for a number of them, based on the religion abusing its followers.

Thank you for your honest answer.

 

[Abhorsen]

Thank you for your honest answer.

Conversely, I do respect a number of religions for the good that they inspire their followers to do. I just can't get myself to honestly believe in them. It would be nice to believe in some religion, and believe in a life after death, but I cannot do it without lying to myself.

 

[The Name of Love]

Conversely, I do respect a number of religions for the good that they inspire their followers to do. I just can't get myself to honestly believe in them. It would be nice to believe in some religion, and believe in a life after death, but I cannot do it without lying to myself.

Well, I invite you to come and take a look at the philosophy thread I have (link is in my signature). I go over the numerous problems with modern philosophy that make it intellectually difficult for people in the modern west to believe in God.

 

[Certified_Heterosexual]

In my experience as a current Christian and ex-atheist, it's not uncommon to encounter atheists who are both well-read and charitable... in settings where serious people discuss metaphysics in a serious way. I have no doubt that the atheists who are inclined to do this are motivated by what they see as serious logical problems with the idea of a god. but because of that, because they were argued into atheism first and the emotional justifications came later, they don't feel very inclined to be angry about it.

I draw a distinction because these people, the "high-church atheists" and the "low-church" or "pop" atheists. Pop atheists are, in many cases, initially motivated by anger at God, or religious people in their lives, or at the very least, resentment of religious restrictions on behavior.

Let me add some nuance to this poast.

Pop Atheism has the intellectual gravitas of a three-year-old closing their eyes and saying, "you can't see me!" Human beings don't even have mastery of their own personal experiences. Why do you dream? Why do you sneeze, exactly? Seriously, my brother sneezes seven times every morning when he wakes up, and I only sneeze when I'm sick or it's dusty. Why do you yawn when you see someone else yawn? Why do you turn your head when someone is staring at you? How do you know the other driver as seen you at a four-way stop? Why do dogs enjoy the smell of poo? Why do monarch butterflies instinctively know migration routes? Why do I have a better sense of time when I DON'T look at clock?

Pop atheists are either people who had something very dark and awful happen to them as a child, and caused them to stay stuck in a Santa Claus version of God and when Santa failed to deliver decided pouting was the best revenge, or people who have been such conformists and invested so heavily into their Misery-Farmer's energetic policies that are bleating, "Four-legs good, two-legs better!" separating themselves further from their source of strength (God aka the Ground of all Being who knit your soul from the void before the worlds were young), and closer to plastic figurines produced by their fine friends at Disney. The concept that if one cannot understand something through their (limited, easily tricked) senses it therefore does not exist beggars belief.

Which is, of course, why high-church atheists typically have better and more interesting arguments.

 

[GoldRanger]

Had a conversation with a friend, the other day, regarding religion. Dangerous topic, I know, but anyway, Atheism came up and he brought up a point I've not heard in a long time.

"Atheists are angry at God."

I kinda want to see how some of the more erudite posters would take such a hypothesis, as I think there's a case for it. The world is full of suffering, people are evil often enough to make the world miserable, and it's all easily preventable. That said, just inserting words into the mouths of Atheists who can speak for themselves is a little poor etiquette, but it's surely the case for some?

I apologise in advance if I'm offending someone. I respect your faith, even if I don't share it, and some of what I write below will undoubtedly be difficult to hear for believers, but rest assured that it's not an arrogant, sneering attempt at making fun of your faith, as some atheists unfortunately do (and as I did before I grew out of the edgy phase, after highschool), but a genuine effort at explaining my though processes and feelings. I tried to keep my tone neutral and not offensive, and again I apologize if some of it still ended up being offensive. That said, please stop reading if you are sensitive to blasphemy, because as an atheist I cannot explain my worldview without engaging in it.

Let's get right to business then.

I'm an atheist. I'm not angry at a "God" in the slightest, the world is an OK place at the very least despite the terrors that occur in it, and my life is a pretty decent one for a person from the first world (and probably way above average when you factor in the third world, blessed even). I am angry at religious people for various reasons (most having to do with their incessant attempts to control my life), but the reason for my atheism is that I genuinely don't think there is any God out there, based on what I observe of the universe. It makes so much more sense that God is just another myth, like the vampire or the sasquach. Humans are very good at inventing myths, so why does God get a pass, because more people are conditioned from birth to believe in him? That's a cult like mindset. For that matter, as someone who is outside looking in, it's very hard for me to distinguish between a cult and a mainstream religion, aside from popularity (I don't try to insult anyone and I'll be happy to be shown otherwise, this is a neutral observation, although I know how badly it must sound).

In conclusion, nothing anyone has ever said has ever convinced me that there's a guiding hand manipulating human affairs from above, much less that this hand is all-powerful and all-knowing. I feel that science has given us satisfactory explanations for most of the mysteries we used to attribute to God, so I genuinely just CAN'T believe in God, to me it's really obvious from looking at the world (and not at human suffering, that just invalidates the idea of a perfectly kind God rather than the existence of any God) that it is rudderless. Looking inward, I genuinely don't see myself angry at God, in fact there's a part of me that would like to join up in God's worship if somebody gave me a REAL reason to believe. I could see myself finding comfort in prayer if I could convince myself it's not a futile gesture.

Alas, it is not forthcoming as evidence is anthithetical to the concept of faith - a curious coincidence isn't it, how religions contain "defense mechanisms" conveniently designed to prevent people from straying from the religion, even in the face of contradictory evidence. Virtually anywhere you look, religion is explainable by mundane mechanisms. That's another reason why I can't just accept, it looks and feels untrue on a visceral level, and by that I mean all religions I've encountered.

I think religious people NEED atheists to be angry at God at some level, because it explains their existence without indulging in the more scary option - that they are seeing the world without blinders on, and that they're right.

Crap, it probably came out as more offensive than intended, but I can think of no more polite way to spell out my thinking. I respect religious people since I acknowledge that I am not infallible and could be wrong about everything, even though it looks and intuitively feels overwhelmingly correct to me. And also because they have a right to believe whatever they want, even if I personally disagree with it. As long as they don't try to force me to live my life according to their religion, in which case the gloves are off and all stops are pulled, no matter if it's Islam, Christianity, Judaism or another religion entirely, or even a secular ideology. I love my way of life and nobody is going to fuck with it without my consent.

 

[Scottty]

I think religious people NEED atheists to be angry at God at some level, because it explains their existence without indulging in the more scary option - that they are seeing the world without blinders on, and that they're right.

No, some types of religious people feel a need to deny that anyone who disagrees with them could possibly be doing so honestly. So your actual reasons for not believing what they tell you to will get dismissed in favor of speculations about your motives.

 

[Deleted member 88]

I mean, throughout my life I have seriously considered the idea that my religion is false. I have faith, in its veracity. But even the apostle Paul remarked that “if the resurrection is not ,we would be the most pitiable of men”. (Somewhat paraphrased)

Do some religious people need atheists to be irrational? Sure. But definitely not all that of them.

 

[SergeantBrother]

But even the apostle Paul remarked that “if the resurrection is not ,we would be the most pitiable of men”. (Somewhat paraphrased)

If atheism is correct, then I would have to say that existence is tragic.

 

[GoldRanger]

No, some types of religious people feel a need to deny that anyone who disagrees with them could possibly be doing so honestly. So your actual reasons for not believing what they tell you to will get dismissed in favor of speculations about your motives.

Correction accepted.

If atheism is correct, then I would have to say that existence is tragic.

Existence is indeed tragic on some level, I think, but I believe that in the end what matters is that we all find happiness, whether through religion (which is, from an atheistic viewpoint, just another self-delusion that attempts to hide the terrfiying pointlessness of existence from ourselves), or without it. I believe I am, if not happy, then definitely satisfied with life. Existence is pointless, but the very concept of "purpose" stems from human psychology I believe, and it can be argued that it has much less value than it would first seem. If I enjoy life, materially and spiritually speaking (I can nourish my spirit by, say, learning about secular philosophy, science, hell even a good thought-out science fiction novel gives me that "fullness" feel. I often compare it with food) does it matter if it has some secret, higher purpose imposed on us from above? I'd say that it doesn't.

I have goals and expectations in mind for myself, and I have a vision of what I want humanity as a whole to achieve, stemming simply from my personal experiences and convictions rather than on some structured ideology or dogma. I feel like adding God to this equation will only interfere with said visions rather than aid them.

 

[Deleted member 88]

I think the main problem with atheism is that if the universe is pointless-than all things are permissible.

I suppose one could take Camus’ advice and make your own oasis in the desert. But that’s about all you can get from a universe in which there is no ultimate telos or supreme authority.

 

[SergeantBrother]

Existence is indeed tragic on some level, I think, but I believe that in the end what matters is that we all find happiness, whether through religion (which is, from an atheistic viewpoint, just another self-delusion that attempts to hide the terrfiying pointlessness of existence from ourselves), or without it. I believe I am, if not happy, then definitely satisfied with life. Existence is pointless, but the very concept of "purpose" stems from human psychology I believe, and it can be argued that it has much less value than it would first seem. If I enjoy life, materially and spiritually speaking (I can nourish my spirit by, say, learning about secular philosophy, science, hell even a good thought-out science fiction novel gives me that "fullness" feel. I often compare it with food) does it matter if it has some secret, higher purpose imposed on us from above? I'd say that it doesn't.

I have goals and expectations in mind for myself, and I have a vision of what I want humanity as a whole to achieve, stemming simply from my personal experiences and convictions rather than on some structured ideology or dogma. I feel like adding God to this equation will only interfere with said visions rather than aid them.

I'm actually alright with there being no ultimate purpose. Increasing happiness, reducing suffering, family and culture, advancing truth and beauty - these are adequate purpose for me though they may only be subjectively valuable. Adding a deity to the equation doesn't necessarily add any greater meaning.

The great tragedy for me is the impermanence and unfairness of life - so many suffer for no reason, some living brutally short and unpleasant lives. After a relatively short period of time we are snuffed out of existence, all of our memories, experiences, loves, hatreds, joys and passions - all going into oblivion. Like tears in rain. That is tragic for me.

I think the main problem with atheism is that if the universe is pointless-than all things are permissible.

I suppose one could take Camus’ advice and make your own oasis in the desert. But that’s about all you can get from a universe in which there is no ultimate telos or supreme authority.

All things aren't permissible though. There are still consequences for actions imposed by the laws of physics or by society. Jumping off a cliff will still result in death and committing murder can still result in punishment. Limitations on our conduct in both cases arise from our nature, not necessarily from any external law giver. Of course, some people can get away with murder. That's just true though, some people do get away with murder so it's up to humans to try to prevent that.

Actually, even within a theistic paradigm, there is some question as to whether or not there is some absolute transcendent morality. Does God create morality? If so then it's arbitrary. Does God simply know what is right? If so, then there is a morality separate from God which humanity could independently discover. The Euthyphro Dilemma basically.

Also, for many prominent theistic world views, there aren't necessarily any punishments for bad behavior or any rewards for good behavior. Some Christians would say that a person could spend a life raping and torturing children and would go to heaven if they were a Christian (or maybe had a deathbed conversion) or that a non-Christian could spend a life of selflessly helping others and even give their lives for others and suffer eternal torture for not being Christian. Not all Christians believe this, but this kind of system would be even less fair than the atheist world view.

 

[Deleted member 88]

God in Christianity is the supreme giver and judge of morality. And what is good is defined as God himself and all goodness comes from him.

Thus-regarding soteriology, it is bad, morally bad to reject the gospel of Jesus Christ. A wretched murderer and rapist who accepts Jesus as savior on his execution day has his sins washed away-not from earthly punishment but from God’s book. That’s the point of Jesus blood-it’s a payment of sorts to cover the cost of sin. A non Christian who otherwise lives a virtuous and good life may have less numerical sins than the former-but the sin debt is still unpaid and thus exerts a punishment. As God can not tolerate sin-the virtuous unbeliever must be damned for having their sin “on their record” so to speak.

 

[Jormungandr]

I'm an atheist and I'm not angry at God. In fact I respect religions role in building civilizations. I'd imagine most angry atheists are communists and or edgy teens. With a smattering of average folks thrown in.

Also an atheist, and I have no anger towards any deity that may or may not exist.

To simply say "all atheists are angry at God" is, frankly, hilariously stupid, arrogant, and utterly dismissive based on their own biased viewpoint that their deity must exist.

I respect what religion has done for civilization (it pretty much founded Western civilization, after all, even if batshit insane Lefties are trying to tear it down now), and that it's a necessary evil despite the outright evils that have been committed in its name (e.g. atrocities): community, traditions, family, and bond-building towards your fellow man and all, and the moral lessons (fables) in holy books are sound -- don't be a cunt to your neighbor, don't be lazy, et cetera, they're all good things.

Man is pretty much hardwired for religion in some shape or form, be it Xenu, the Abrahamic God, Zeus, or Sun Worship.

As for why I'm an atheist? I think it's all bullshit.

Every religion can be traced back to a prior one in some form, even the modern titans. It's like the family trees of languages and alphabets, especially Indo-European ones.

Historical examples?

Artemis was originally a native, mountain spring goddess before being adapted into the Artemis we most commonly know her as in Ancient Greek religion. She was then, in this form, promptly appropriated into the Roman pantheon as Diana. As she spread across Europe, IIRC she was further changed in local cults in the UK to something else, also being mixed with Celtic/Native and later even Norse deities.

Vulcan/Hephaestus and Odin also had this treatment, too.

Aphrodite, who became Venus in Rome, was originally Astarte, who was a mutated cult of Ishta. And let's not go into the further, utterly muddled links of Ancient Egypt's deities, Greece's, and Rome's as they culturally contacted each other more!

Modern examples?

Islam's two main sects? Mutated Abrahamic and native paganism. The various Christian sects? Primarily a Judaism offshoot, with paganism and Celtic/Norse blended in. Judaism? Yahweh was a Canaanite deity, one of many in an entire pantheon, which also had muddled links to the other religions in the Fertile Crescent.

If there is an Almighty out there, he, she, or it are certainly not anything what these religions portray he, she, or it as in their own way. Hell, he/she/it might be fucking Cthulhu for all we know.

So, yeah: complete bullshit with morals and fables that are useful/needed/good to know.

 

[Nitramy]

The thing about religious people thinking that atheists hate God is, I think, due to the fact that they can't process the possibility that there might be more to the concept of God than their anthropomorphic depiction makes God out to be.

It's also why most atheists say they don't hate God, because they've already wrestled that particular beast and put it down, either seeing the world as just what it is (and nothing more), or acknowledge that there is something greater than this, but it's not the anthropomorphic depiction religious people constantly invoke.

 

[SergeantBrother]

God in Christianity is the supreme giver and judge of morality. And what is good is defined as God himself and all goodness comes from him.

If that is how we are defining goodness, then goodness isn't necessarily desirable for humans. The worst atrocities could be moral if God approves them, the most benevolent acts could be evil if God disapproves. Now, I suppose this could be a definition that we could use, but it isn't necessarily the case that the existence of this kind of goodness is preferable to the morality that humans create in the absence of God.

Thus-regarding soteriology, it is bad, morally bad to reject the gospel of Jesus Christ. A wretched murderer and rapist who accepts Jesus as savior on his execution day has his sins washed away-not from earthly punishment but from God’s book. That’s the point of Jesus blood-it’s a payment of sorts to cover the cost of sin. A non Christian who otherwise lives a virtuous and good life may have less numerical sins than the former-but the sin debt is still unpaid and thus exerts a punishment. As God can not tolerate sin-the virtuous unbeliever must be damned for having their sin “on their record” so to speak.

This is an extremely unfair system. That doesn't mean it's not true, but it's not a very strong argument for God's existence to say that without God all things are permissible when you believe that all things are permissible (aside from skepticism) with God too.

 

[Terthna]

@Jormungandr
You just described a great deal of the logic that went into how I ultimately became an Agnostic Theist; with the caveat that I still believe in the existence of a higher power of some sort. There are countless stories about the sun throughout human history that try to explain what it is, why it's there, how it works, et cetera, et cetera; but the one thing those stories and science can agree on, is that the sun exists. It isn't some concoction of our imaginations, it is a real thing that can be observed.

What does this have to do with god? Simple; god is just shorthand for the origin of all creation. For the scientifically inclined, this takes the form of the big bang, or rather; whatever existed before the big bang. Something caused the big bang, and thereby created everything; we don't know what, we don't know why, we don't even know if there was an intelligence behind it or not, but it happened regardless. Many people ascribe an intelligence to it, and try to divine what it wants, because we are first and foremost a species obsessed with finding patterns in all things, even when and where they don't exist. We also find it very difficult to look beyond our own perspective, so our first instinct in trying to achieve that end is to anthropomorphize what we don't understand; which is where gods pulling the sun across the sky in their chariots came from.

Though none of this is evidence that god does not exist; only evidence that we're delusional fools trying to make sense of something that, so far, does not. God could very well exist (I'd argue it's more likely than not), as could the human soul and an afterlife of some form; but assuming they do, odds are we haven't even come close to describing their true forms as of yet.

God in Christianity is the supreme giver and judge of morality. And what is good is defined as God himself and all goodness comes from him.

Thus-regarding soteriology, it is bad, morally bad to reject the gospel of Jesus Christ. A wretched murderer and rapist who accepts Jesus as savior on his execution day has his sins washed away-not from earthly punishment but from God’s book. That’s the point of Jesus blood-it’s a payment of sorts to cover the cost of sin. A non Christian who otherwise lives a virtuous and good life may have less numerical sins than the former-but the sin debt is still unpaid and thus exerts a punishment. As God can not tolerate sin-the virtuous unbeliever must be damned for having their sin “on their record” so to speak.

In which case, the Christian god is nothing more than an evil tyrant, imposing his will on the unwilling; but then I know devout Christians who would consider what you just said heretical, that god does not punish non-believers simply for not believing, so to say that every Christian believes such is simply false.

In the end though, all of it is based on nothing more than stories a great many people have convinced themselves are true (though they may be interpreted in drastically different ways, depending on said person). In that sense, from an outsider's perspective, there is very little that differentiates Christianity from, say, Scientology; outside of the seniority of the former, and the comparative unity of the latter.