Why can't some people accept that atheists really, honestly, genuinely don't believe that gods exist?

Question

I see people say "Oh those atheists, of course they don't *really* believe that my god doesn't exist - they just deny it so they can carry on with their wicked lives"... or something along those lines... I find it amusing in a way, and rather sad, that they can't accept that their religious mythology is rejected by others.

Why are they in denial?

Answer 1

Quite simply, their minds work differently than rational minds. There are subtleties at work here that seem to be escaping the notice of most people. They have to do with the nature of 'belief'.

A rational person might say "I believe in the Big Bang." A religious person might say "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis." But these statements are not even remotely similar, with respect to what is meant by the word 'believe'.

For the rational person, the statement of 'belief' in the Big Bang means that they understand that the concept provides a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the evidence, which accounts for the evolution of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initiating event, up until the present. When the 'inflationary model' came to the fore, rational people said "Well, good... that clears up a few questions and makes things even more coherent." NOBODY threw up their arms and wailed "Oh, no... oh, no... ain't so... ain't so... the Big Bang is the inerrant truth... not this ridiculous, atheistic 'inflationary' model."

See... when we say "I believe in the Big Bang", we don't really mean the same thing as the religious person means when he says "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis," or "I believe in God." Our 'belief' in the Big Bang (or anything else) isn't really a 'belief'... it is more properly a 'paradigm'... a useful way of looking at something, or thinking about something. If additional information is uncovered that adds to the conceptual model, that is a good thing... not a disaster. If part of the conceptual model is discovered to be incorrect, and must be tossed in the trash and replaced with something completely different... that is also a good thing... not the end of the world as we know it. And often, no matter how highly confident we may be of the accuracy or completeness of a particular paradigm, we may have reason to apply a DIFFERENT paradigm to the same thing, in an effort to tease out new insights; for example, we might want to contemplate the potential implications of a change to a theory from the perspective of the Tao Te Ching, the Gaia hypothesis, or ecological homeostasis. We KNOW that all theories are approximations... and that is OK. We KNOW that we don't have all the answers... and that is OK, too. There is nothing wrong with saying "We don't know... yet; but we're working on it."

But these modes of thinking, perceiving, contemplating and understanding are utterly alien to the 'religious' mind. For the religious mind, a 'belief' is not a paradigm... not a useful way of thinking about something... it is an internalized conviction that one knows the absolute 'truth' pertaining to some aspect of existence and/or fundamental reality. 'Beliefs' are one of the key interpretive component filter of the religious person's 'self-description'... a part of what DEFINES them as a person... the very thing that creates their world-view... an underpinning of their 'subjective reality'. Any attack on one of these internalized 'beliefs' is perceived and interpreted as a vital threat... an attack upon the 'self-description'... and attack on their subjective reality.

And here is the key difference: When there is a change in one of the paradigms dealing with a scientific concept, or a new insight into the workings of the universe, to the 'rational' person, it merely constitutes an interesting new piece of knowledge and understanding. However, if that same new insight, or piece of information (a feature of the universe, for example) seems to threaten a tenet of Christianity, everybody goes to battle stations, goes into 'damage control' mode... for fear that the whole edifice will come crashing down. And, ultimately, it will.

So, when a fundie disparages evolution, for example, it really has nothing to do with a genuine, intellectual dispute regarding scientific details... they are generally scientifically illiterate, anyway. Any 'scientific' arguments that they present are inevitably not even understood... they are just lifted from the pre-packaged lies and misrepresentations that are found on dozens of 'Liars for Jesus' (LFJ) web sites, and parroted. They are in a battle. They are trying to sink science before science sinks them. They are desperate... and science is (mostly, and unfortunately) oblivious to the fact that they are even in a fight, and that somebody is trying to sink them. They are just blithely bopping along, doing what science does... figuring out how nature works.

No... none of this has anything to do with a mere disagreement pertaining to evidence and understanding. It has to do with minds that deal with fundamental issues in an entirely different way. It has to do with a flexible, open-minded, intellectually honest (willing to question and doubt one's own presumptions) curiosity about the universe, contending with a rigid, unyielding world-view that depends from a certainty that certain delusional faith-based (willful ignorance and magical, wishful thinking) 'beliefs' represent the absolute 'truth' of reality.

We might as well be talking to an alien species, from a distant planet.

When the religious enter a forum like this one, they are (generally) NOT seeking new information which might allow them to QUESTION their beliefs more effectively, or might put their beliefs at risk... they are seeking VALIDATION... of their beliefs, and hence, their self-description.

Answer 2

2

Answer 3

Because it's very difficult to understand...

If you think about it, "god" is everywhere.

In my own personal journey to atheism, it was very, very hard to take that first step. I had gone to a private lutheran school and been taught all about god and jesus and all that. Once I began down the road, I began to ask questions and do research as to how religions start and how they grow.

After several years, I was able to say out loud "There is no god" and really mean it.

Now, I feel so free, I am no longer bound to a make-believe person. I'm still a law abiding person but because I choose to be, not because I fear "hell"

Anyone who decides to look deeply at this has a difficult road, not only the first step but all the other steps, the concept of god is everywhere. Family, Friends, Work, Government.

Answer 4

I reject your anti-religious beliefs just as vehemently as you reject my beliefs. I do not have enough faith to accept the myth that I am here by accident or some cosmic mutation. I might also add that I find nothing amusing about your beliefs but am saddened by them. It also seems to me that you are the one in denial about the existence of God, I don't deny for one instant that there are people that reject the existence of God. Why do you ask for tolerance when it comes to your personal views when you obviously are so intolerant of my views. One thing I know, there will be no atheists in hell.....think about it.

Answer 5

It is difficult for me to believe that anyone can deny the existence of God. When I visit the museum I wonder about all the works of art and what might have been going on in the minds of the artists as they created such magnificent works of art. To come to the conclusion after such an excursion, "There are no artists!", would be insanity. All that paint, canvas, marble, glass and metal was some product of an explosion in the middle of the forest, which was the product of an explosion on earth which was a product of an explosion in our solar system which was the product of an explosion.......etc.....

To see the universe in all its glorious clockwork precision and to assume that there is no God is equally foolish.

Most atheists I have met are highly educated and relatively intelligent people yet they fail to see the forest for the trees.

Answer 6

It is probably comforting to them. They perhaps cannot fathom that people can think for themselves and draw conclusions without the church interfering.

Christians apply their theology to everyone though. They feel that people who aren't Christian worship Satan, even though Satan does not exists outside of the Abrahamic faiths. They also say that non-Christians go to Hell, even though other religions don't believe that Hell exists either. They are just used to applying their ways of thinking outside of themselves, so this isn't a stretch for them either.

There is also a lot of theology up through the Middle Ages that says that people hate God because they want to be God, and it may stem from that as well.

Someone at the bottom wrote that "there are no Atheists in warfare," which isn't true because the government has tombstones for deceased soldiers with the Atheist symbol on it! This wouldn't be needed if there were not Atheists!

Answer 7

I think part of the denial is based on their own fear. They are very frightened by the possibility that one might actually be able to reject their beliefs from a rational standpoint. They need their beliefs for some psychological reason, and therefore they can't admit that their beliefs could be considered irrational by any intelligent person. So they comfort themselves by telling themselves that Atheists are just in denial, because of some desire to commit evil, or whatever.

Answer 8

This is nothing more than hypocrisy. They're able to accept (albeit with reservations) the fact that some people practise other faiths -- that is, so long as those faiths require actual prayers and study of scripture and other recognizable religious practises.

But having no faith at all, and never saying a prayer nor visiting a church / mosque / synagogue? -- why, that's just unfathomable.

Answer 9

Probably for the same reasons that some atheists laugh at christians and think their beliefs are a myth.

You believe you are alive don't you? I believe I am alive also. I don't say your belief in no God is a myth, so why would you say that my belief is a myth? Because it has not been physically proven? That's odd, because we already know that there are things we cannot physically prove with our technology but still accept them as a possibility.

All I ask if that you respect my right to have my belief because I respect your right to have yours. I just think it would be nice if you would be open minded enough to allow it to enter your consciousness that there is a possiblility that there are other possibilities other than your own. You don't have to believe it, just accept it as a possibility as I accept your belief as a possibility. Is that too much to ask?

Answer 10

you're speaking approximately people who use the mythology of the classic center East as an excuse to have confidence in magic and function an imaginary buddy. Their judgement is obviously impaired, and their draw close on certainty questionable.