Are atheists afraid of God?

[Paul of Tarsus]

In response to Stephen Hawking's quip, "Religion is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark," apologist John Lennox said, "And atheism is a fairy story for those afraid of the light."

Do atheists fear that light aka God? I would answer no assuming I knew atheists to be completely sensible and rational in their rejection of theism, but they very often aren't sensible and rational in their unbelief. In this forum, for example, an atheist said he lost his belief in God when he realized that there are different religions. When I tried to explain to him that those conflicting faiths can be explained as some of them getting a real God wrong, well, it did me no good! It's simply illogical to conclude that God doesn't exist because some people disagree about him. His atheism is obviously based on faulty logic. What's odd about these cases involving atheists using poor reasoning to reject God is that those atheists seem quite reasonable otherwise. My guess is that they fear God and wish that he doesn't exist. Atheism is for them a sanctuary from theism and a hope that reality harbors no scary God.

[brunumb]

The big difference between the way atheists react to the issue of God's existence and the way Christians react the issue of pixies' existence, though, is that few if any Christians actually spend a lot of time and effort trying to demonstrate that pixies don't exist, and neither do most Christians get emotionally involved in the issue of the existence of pixies.

Pixieists don't go around trying to push their beliefs down the throats of everyone they encounter, or try to enshrine aspects of pixie dogma in the laws of the land.

[brunumb]

They found him there; he was dead and hanging by his coat from a spike jutting out of the wall that had caught his coat. Evidently he had thought that something had grabbed a hold of him, and his heart failed him.

Evidently? Is this another example of the famed Christian mind-reading skills? Now it even works on dead people. Too funny.

[brunumb]

It's common for people to doubt their beliefs, and atheists are no exceptions to that rule. There's always that thought in the back of the mind: I could be wrong.

It applies to theists as well. "I could be wrong. Yep, I'm wrong". That could partly go to explaining the decline in Christianity in developed countries.

[Paul of Tarsus]

From my observations of and interactions with atheists as well as the studies I have read on this topic, I have discovered that there are a variety of reasons why some people don't believe in God.

Yes, and those reasons to be atheistic go well beyond "lack of belief in gods." Atheism isn't nearly as passive as a lot of atheists claim but is often an active denial of God.

So many Christians make this assumption - they are really misidentifying [thus misrepresenting] what an atheist is [as a position]

What you are actually describing are atheists who have shifted their position from the inactive "lacking belief in gods" to the active "arguing that gods do not exist" which is a sub-position of atheism - usually "non-theist" or "anti-theist"...The OP is actually more describing the anti-theist position than the atheist one.

I'm really not here to argue semantics, but let's just define an atheist as a person who doesn't believe in God. So do people who don't believe in God fear God or fear that God exists?

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #1]

In this forum, for example, an atheist said he lost his belief in God when he realized that there are different religions. When I tried to explain to him that those conflicting faiths can be explained as some of them getting a real God wrong, well, it did me no good!

This is reasonable.

It may be that in seeing the differences one also sees the similarities but there is nothing in any religion which appears to bring all the religious beliefs together and Christianity can be compared to other religions when taking the imagery into consideration.

While the claim might be that Christianity presents "The Real God" the actuality is that they are simply presenting somewhat tweaked ideas of religious imagery - and adopting these as their own and claiming these as 'real' or 'the truth' ... or something that they 'believe on faith' to be true...but therein is the illogical to which atheists lacking belief, see no point in believing simply on faith, because it is not logical to do so.

I'm afraid I don't follow what you're saying here. How is it reasonable to conclude that if people cannot agree on something, then that something doesn't exist? Some scientists disagree with other scientists regarding how the moon formed, so do you then conclude that the moon doesn't exist? There is disagreement regarding the moon's formation, so to be "reasonable," you need to be an "amoonist."

Of course, coming to that conclusion is nonsense, so why is coming to such a conclusion regarding God any different? I agree that the multiplicity of religions is a problem for theism or at least monotheism, but to say it disproves God is presumptuous at best. When people disagree, then we know that some of them must be wrong, but to say they are all wrong is a fallacy.

[Paul of Tarsus]

The "logic" in the arguments against God (at least in this forum) is as bad or worse than the reasoning employed by your "village Christian."

The "village Christian" you refer to, like the vast majority of Christians and other theists, did not gain their belief in God through logic or arguments. They had their beliefs inculcated into vulnerable minds through indoctrination. Everything else is an attempt at post hoc rationalisation.

Oh, now I see. So that's why village atheists are so much like their Christian counterparts.

The "logic" in the arguments against God (at least in this forum) is as bad or worse than the reasoning employed by your "village Christian." I have trouble believing that anybody can be that stupid as to use such twisted and easily refuted arguments against God.

What logic and arguments that can so easily be refuted are you referring to?

The one concluding that God doesn't exist because we supposedly have no evidence for him is a real howler.

[William]

This question is akin to asking if Christians are afraid of pixies.

Assuming that Christians have a reputation for denying the existence of pixies, then yes, the two questions are analogous. The big difference between the way atheists react to the issue of God's existence and the way Christians react the issue of pixies' existence, though, is that few if any Christians actually spend a lot of time and effort trying to demonstrate that pixies don't exist, and neither do most Christians get emotionally involved in the issue of the existence of pixies. Atheists, on the other hand, are often not so dispassionate when pondering if God exists. The idea of God existing seems very distasteful to them.

That is one of the major judgements against Christianity - like other religions, Christianity has made the idea of God so distasteful that many reject the idea of God altogether.
The other major cause of rejection is that those who do, cannot imagine a Creator as 'good' in relation to the Creation, because they judge that there is 'evil' in the creation and have no known way in which to bridge that apparent gap

How can one be afraid of something they hold no belief in?

I'm not sure how or why the human psyche can harbor contradictory thoughts and feelings, but it can and often does. So you tell me how people can fear what they don't believe in.

I would argue that since it is just an assumption built around a guess, that it is not a relevant argument that someone holding no beliefs can fear what they hold no belief in.

Let me tell you a brief "ghost story" to illustrate my point. A tough guy boasted to his friends at the bar that he was afraid of nothing and didn't believe in ghosts. His buddies dared him to spend a night at a local abandoned prison that was reputedly haunted. He took them up on the dare. The next day he didn't show, and his friends searched the abandoned prison for him. They found him there; he was dead and hanging by his coat from a spike jutting out of the wall that had caught his coat. Evidently he had thought that something had grabbed a hold of him, and his heart failed him.

So the moral of this ghost story is that what we think and what we feel are often two different things. This man knew that there are no spooks or ghosts, but on that lonely, dark night as he walked through the abandoned cells that had long ago confined and tormented violent criminals, his feelings told him to beware.

That reminds me of another story.

An unbeliever in life after death was told by a Christian that if he didn't believe in God, he would burn in hell.
The unbeliever dies only to find himself still alive and immediately panicked remembering the words of the Christian.
In that, he was enveloped by flames and suffered the results - but did not die from the experience. He just unceasingly suffered from it.
The next day the Christian died and went to heaven, only in that heaven were also all the individuals he had told would suffer in Hell for not believing in God.
He could hear their ceaseless cries of agony and smell the rancid burning of their flesh and see their suffering and when the Christian realized that this would be forever, he cried out to his God to stop it.

This happened because neither the unbeliever nor the believer understood that after death the next experience one had, involved ones beliefs and the nature of the environment responded to those beliefs and made it so.

The unbeliever had chosen to assume that the Christian must have been right - [just as the tough guy in the ghost story had allowed the rumors of the 'haunted" abandoned prison to get into his head and cause the panic that lead to his fatality.]

If someone is actually afraid of the Christian god, then they are not truly an atheist because they believe this god to exist.

Some are figuratively afraid that the Christian God exists in that they admit that they will suffer the terrible consequences of NOT believing in said God but still prefer that to having to bow down and worship such a monstrosity.
But they are being figurative rather than believing such a monstrosity actually exists.

It's common for people to doubt their beliefs, and atheists are no exceptions to that rule. There's always that thought in the back of the mind: I could be wrong. And under some extreme circumstances, atheists might fear God like the "tough guy" feared ghosts. Old age and getting nearer death, for example, can cause an atheist to change his mind. It happened to Antony Flew.

Some Christians believe in God but do not believe that they will necessarily be raised from the dead and given eternal life - in heaven or in hell as they think that this is purely up to God to decide.

[William]

From my observations of and interactions with atheists as well as the studies I have read on this topic, I have discovered that there are a variety of reasons why some people don't believe in God.

Yes, and those reasons to be atheistic go well beyond "lack of belief in gods." Atheism isn't nearly as passive as a lot of atheists claim but is often an active denial of God.

So many Christians make this assumption - they are really misidentifying [thus misrepresenting] what an atheist is [as a position]

What you are actually describing are atheists who have shifted their position from the inactive "lacking belief in gods" to the active "arguing that gods do not exist" which is a sub-position of atheism - usually "non-theist" or "anti-theist"...The OP is actually more describing the anti-theist position than the atheist one.

I'm really not here to argue semantics, but let's just define an atheist as a person who doesn't believe in God. So do people who don't believe in God fear God or fear that God exists?

Why not call those ones anti theists, because anti-theist atheists fit the description. Do anti theists fear the Christian God turning out to be the real God? I have no examples either way. I suppose one would need to examine why they are anti-theist and what would make them fear the Christian God specifically.

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #1]

In this forum, for example, an atheist said he lost his belief in God when he realized that there are different religions. When I tried to explain to him that those conflicting faiths can be explained as some of them getting a real God wrong, well, it did me no good!

This is reasonable.

It may be that in seeing the differences one also sees the similarities but there is nothing in any religion which appears to bring all the religious beliefs together and Christianity can be compared to other religions when taking the imagery into consideration.

While the claim might be that Christianity presents "The Real God" the actuality is that they are simply presenting somewhat tweaked ideas of religious imagery - and adopting these as their own and claiming these as 'real' or 'the truth' ... or something that they 'believe on faith' to be true...but therein is the illogical to which atheists lacking belief, see no point in believing simply on faith, because it is not logical to do so.

I'm afraid I don't follow what you're saying here.

Is it the case that the claim might be that Christianity presents "The Real God"?

If "Yes" then is the claim supported by evidence?

If "no" then should the claim be accepted on faith?

If "no" then why

If "Because that is illogical" then "Remain in the position of lacking belief in gods"

How is it reasonable to conclude that if people cannot agree on something, then that something doesn't exist? Some scientists disagree with other scientists regarding how the moon formed, so do you then conclude that the moon doesn't exist? There is disagreement regarding the moon's formation, so to be "reasonable," you need to be an "amoonist."

Of course, coming to that conclusion is nonsense, so why is coming to such a conclusion regarding God any different?

Off the top of my head, "Because the moon is there". [How the moon came into existence is another issue.] No scientist in your example is arguing that the moon does not exist.

However, the analogy is skewed because an atheist lacks belief in something which cannot be pointed to like the moon and agreed together that it surely does exist.

I agree that the multiplicity of religions is a problem for theism or at least monotheism, but to say it disproves God is presumptuous at best.

It is a weak argument I agree. It is more likely a shorthand off the cuff remark intended to portray a dislike for religion than for every idea of a Creator. Religion has - after all - had any amount of time to prove "God is Good" but hasn't pulled that one off yet.

When people disagree, then we know that some of them must be wrong, but to say they are all wrong is a fallacy.

To say that they are all right is also fallacy.

Indeed - given the human position it is far more likely that all the theories are wrong than any one of them is right. So that being the case, it is best to place faith and belief aside until far more knowledge is gained in which to make a right choice, if indeed choice is available.

For many atheists, the right choice available is to continue lacking in belief. For anti theists [the ones I think you are actually referring to] their right choice available is to go to lengths to fight against religion [Christianity in this case] taking hold to the degree that it has done in the past whereby it rules- and witches burn. For many who are anti-Christianity, this means constantly fighting to make sure that where Christianity has taken hold [is an influence in social law for example] that those influences are chipped away at until significantly diminished and rendered harmless and largely ignored opinions of a few.

I dare say that such a mission is not motivated by 'fear' either of Christians or their idea of God.

[otseng]

[Replying to Miles in post #3]

Moderator Comment

Just a reminder to please avoid any usage of profanity.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[otseng]

I have trouble believing that anybody can be that stupid as to use such twisted and easily refuted arguments against God.

Moderator Comment

It's best to avoid characterizing another's position as stupid.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Purple Knight]

Do atheists fear that light aka God?

Do you fear a normal human who has the ability to push you into a pit of lava? Of course you do. If God exists and it has all the powers ascribed to it, of course I'm afraid of it.

That has no bearing on whether I should obey it. I should only obey it if it would make me a good person.

The basic problem with painting atheists as simply terrified of God would be that... if they were so... then they would be Christians.

The people who are simply terrified of God are inside the set of people who obey God, not outside of it. That's not really a great reason to obey anybody and if you want to call them not real Christians, go for it and I agree. But they're not atheists either. They are practicing Christians.