Thank g/G there is no g/G.

Oh I see, you’re confusing is and ought — Pfhorrest

Oh, you're still living in lalaland.

ooh sick burn bro

Well, which God? There are too many to list, outside the Abrahamic tradition. Would I like to believe in the God of the Old Testament? Absolutely not. Nor the New Testament God for that matter. Would it be nice to think we go on to another better life after this one? That's hard. It sounds good, but eternal existence may be too much for us to handle.

It would be nice to speak to some of the great figures of the past... Oh well.

I think this is an interesting question. I was raised Pentecostal and have studied the history of theology and philosophy. I tend to see a strong element of autobiography in both. Now, after many years I have come to an atheistic/agnostic standpoint, yet (sorry for the melodrama) I mourn the death of God. Maybe I miss the certainty and simplicity of my old worldview. Whatever it is, I can tell you that I am an atheist who actively wants God to exist.

From a logical standpoint, regardless of if god exists or not has no real meaning to our lives.
As such persuing religion has no meaning, but for some it is a reassurance to have an answer to life rather than an understanding of life.

However, is there ever an element of not wanting God to exists? I hope this makes sense. — Georgios Bakalis

I believe that's a big element in atheism. Atheists are afraid of the thought of there being anything higher than themselves hence they hope there isn't.

It's a sort of religion for people with an overblown opinion of themselves like Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao . They all ended in personality cults. Stalin was compared to the sun, etc.

I've not "believed in" any deity (or supernaturalia) for 42 years. After 12 years of a strict Catholic upbringing & education, several years of bible study & altarboy service, comprehensive histories of Mother Church & Christendoms's endless internecine theological disputes, I could no longer @15/16 deny the conspicuous falsity of scriptures, the Nicene Creed & Catechistic teachings. Almost immediately I'd then realized that I'd never had any "faith" to lose. (I've never had "hope" either for or against g/G – to paraphrase Carl Sagan, I've never "hoped" to believe; I simply strive to know.) Comparative religious study soon followed by philosophy became my path and, as Pierre Hadot says, my "spiritual exercise". Midwifed by freethought, grad school-level historical & scientific studies, and hard experience, I've developed from an apostate to a weak atheist to a strong atheist to, for more than a decade now, an antitheist atheist. '"Is there something greater than me?" asked a wave on the ocean beneath the bright, silent Milky Way.' I've known quite a few principled nonbelievers online and offline over the decades and none have resembled your disingenuous caricature, Apollodorus. In kind, all I will say here about "theists" – believers – is this, paraphrasing G.K. Chesterton: Of course, not all believers are idiots but almost all idiots I've ever met are believers.

I've known quite a few principled nonbelievers online and offline over the decades and none have resembled your disingenuous caricature — 180 Proof

I don't know why you're always jumping to conclusions. Maybe you should just relax and think about things a bit first.

I was merely highlighting or bringing into sharper focus what was already implied in the question. IMO that ought to be obvious.

People do tend to be reluctant to admit their own fears but that doesn't mean that those fears don't exist. Ask psychologists and they'll tel you.

I believe that's a big element in atheism. Atheists are afraid of the thought of there being anything higher than themselves hence they hope there isn't. — Apollodorus

It's a pretty old argument and I don't think it is any more true than another old argument - that theists believe in God because they are afraid of death. It's curious to me that both sides in the theism debate seems to think the same sorts of things about the opposing viewpoint. That is it is the product of immaturity and a lack of being fully human.

I've a graduate degree in cognitive psych. Stay in your lane, D-Ker.

I've a graduate degree in cognitive psych. Stay in your lane, D-Ker. — 180 Proof

Yeah, when you run out of arguments you start using threats and abusive language. Sounds about right. If you've got a degree in "cognitive psych" then why can't you explain atheists' fear of religion?

course. Political concerns are often what encourage atheists to be evasive of religious ideals, in combination with their irreligious personalities - they're an additive element, as opposed to a characteristic one. — Aryamoy Mitra

Indeed. I hate to say it, but also a lot of atheists some of which are on this board ( hate to call out 180 but if it quacks like a duck ...well you get the idea) get quite emotional about their belief system. The ironic thing is, if an atheist claims that God does not exist, they put themselves in a precarious and untenable position of trying to defend same.

Otherwise, I do find that your point about politics, and some athiest's emotional defensiveness as it were, are consistent with what Einstein said many years ago. As suggested in the book of Ecclesiastes, there's nothing new under the sun here:

"The fanatical atheists, are like [prisoners] who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who--in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'-- cannot hear the music of the spheres." --Albert Einstein

I hate to say it, but also a lot of atheists some of which are on this board ( hate to call out 180 but if it quacks like a duck ...well you get the idea) get quite emotional about their belief system. — 3017amen

I think "quite emotional" is an understatement. People like @180 sound like a kettle that is permanently on the boil. But seeing that he's got a "graduate degree in cognitive psych" perhaps he's the right person to explain himself. Or maybe not.

And Einstein was totally correct. I think he had Marx in mind. Marx had a grudge against religion and dubbed it "opium of the masses" because he wanted the masses to feed on his own opium of "historical materialism" and worship at the altar of "class-dictatorship of the proletariat".

explain atheists' fear of religion? — Apollodorus

It's not the fear of religion per se. Rather it a fear of what religious people do in the name of their religion.

Speaking as a non-religious Jew living in the US, I am very glad that I am living in a place & time where the worst thing likely to happen to me is some social awkwardness. But around the world there are literally millions of people who - given the opportunity - would have no compunction about killing me and my family simply because of the religion of my grandparents.

I have no problem with people being religious. I have seen first hand how it is a source of comfort and how it helps people figure out how to live their lives in difficult situations. But organized religion is responsible for untold suffering throughout history.

think "quite emotional" is an understatement. People like 180 sound like a kettle that is permanently on the boil — Apollodorus

Indeed. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that unfortunately, the human condition has it that his emotions get the best of him.

Accordingly, that's yet another irony relative to Maslonian behavior, and the whole of human motivations and phenomena... .

Kind of reminds me of some Proverbs from the OT Wisdom Books in Christianity, in that many of his political narratives are akin to a dissonant trumpet blast :joke:

(A) Atheists are afraid of the thought of there being anything higher than themselves hence they hope there isn't. — Apollodorus

(B) People do tend to be reluctant to admit their own fears but that doesn't mean that those fears don't exist. (C) Ask psychologists and they'll tel you. — Apollodorus

(D) I don't know why you're always jumping to conclusions. — Apollodorus

Actually, (A) is jumping to conclusions. (C) is just a weird appeal to authority in an attempt to back up (B); it's weird because (B) is more an excuse to believe (A) without evidence than legitimate evidence for (A).

Yeah, when you run out of arguments you start using threats and abusive language. — Apollodorus

It's interesting that you would perceive a challenge to your jumping to the conclusion of (A) as threats and abusive language, especially in light that you offer emotional excuses to back (A) as opposed to legitimate reasons to believe it.

If you've got a degree in "cognitive psych" then why can't you explain atheists' fear of religion? — Apollodorus

Just to point out, (A) has mutated from fear of a higher power to fear of religion.

Regardless, speaking of jumping to conclusions, it's kind of silly asking for an explanation for something that doesn't exist.

Otherwise, I do find that your point about politics, and some athiest's emotional defensiveness as it were — 3017amen

Emotional responses to gaslighting are easy to explain.

Speaking as a non-religious Jew living in the US, I am very glad that I am living in a place & time where the worst thing likely to happen to me is some social awkwardness. But around the world there are literally millions of people who - given the opportunity - would have no compunction about killing me and my family simply because of the religion of my grandparents. — EricH

I see what you mean and you are perfectly correct. Christians can feel the same in Muslim or Hindu countries.

But I think in a Jewish context it is more likely to be more related to culture or racism, not religion. I don't know if you're familiar with Moses Hess. He wrote:

"The Germans hate less the Jews' religion than they hate their race, they object less to the Jews' particular religion than to their particular noses. Neither religion nor baptism, neither Enlightenment nor Emancipation, will open the gates of social life to the Jews" - Rome and Jerusalem

That was back in 1862 and he was right.

Yeah, when you run out of arguments you start using threats and abusive language. S — Apollodorus

Indeed. I heard through the grapevine that the moderators are considering banning him (180). No matter, it's pretty much a telltale sign that when someone has no other logical arguments, they resort to ad hominem, hence:

"The temptation to belittle others is the trap of a budding intellect, because it gives you the illusion of power and superiority your mind craves. Resist it. It will make you intellectually lazy as you seek "easy marks" to fuel that illusion, [and] a terrible human being to be around, and ultimately, miserable. There is no shame in realizing you have fallen for this trap, only shame on continuing along that path."

Actually, (A) is jumping to conclusions. — InPitzotl

Not at all. It wasn't a "conclusion", it was a suggestion that I thought was already implied in the question - as already indicated.

Just because you're labeling something (A), (B), (C), doesn't make your conclusion valid. Anyone can do that.

Not at all. It wasn't a "conclusion", it was a suggestion that I thought was already implied in the question - as already indicated. — Apollodorus

A suggestion based on what?

Just because you're labeling something (A), (B), (C), doesn't make your conclusion valid. — Apollodorus

You've got this backwards. My conclusion is that (A) is lacking proper justification.

You have to give proper justification for A before it can be taken seriously. I don't have to prove you didn't offer such a thing.

I heard through the grapevine that the moderators are considering banning him. No matter, it's pretty much a telltale sign that when someone has no other arguments, they resort to ad hominem, hence: — 3017amen

I don't think he should be banned. They were trying to ban me by accusing me of being a "Nazi" for making critical observations about the Left. But I do think he's got some serious issues there. It isn't unheard off for those with certain issues to take up the study of psychology. Perhaps in an attempt to self-treat themselves? Maybe he can tell us more himself if he can muster the courage.

You have to give proper justification for A. I don't have to prove you didn't. — InPitzotl

I did provide proper justification. My suggestion is implied in the question "Do atheists hope there is no God?"

Why would they hope that? Possibly because they're afraid of a higher power, so fear would be a possible motivation. And you haven't proved that this isn't the case. You're wasting your time.

Why would they hope that? Possibly because they're afraid of a higher power, so fear would be a possible motivation. — Apollodorus

Or possibly any other reason. I'm out of milk. Possibly it was stolen by a gremlin.

And you haven't proved that this isn't the case. — Apollodorus

Since when does not proving something isn't true justify that the thing is?

You're being asked to provide proper justification, not excuses. You can choose to provide excuses if that's all you have, but you should realize that if this is your choice then you're basically asking people to not take you seriously.

Indeed. I hate to say it, but also a lot of atheists some of which are on this board ( hate to call out 180 but if it quacks like a duck ...well you get the idea) get quite emotional about their belief system. The ironic thing is, if an atheist claims that God does not exist, they put themselves in a precarious and untenable position of trying to defend same. — 3017amen

You're confused. A-theists simply state that they find not only too many problems with g/God stories, but also zero evidence for the real, material existence of any g/God. They may draw from that the conclusion that no such g/God exists, and this an essentially reasonable conclusion. That is, no mere "claims. On the other hand, all theistic argument and belief is exactly claims and nothing else, for there is no evidence.

I myself find all the meaning of "g/God" contained in the only place and way that it can exist, as an idea. But it is an idea that in this modern era gets over the wall and confuses people into thinking it's real.

Of course any theist can settle the matter on the instant by making clear their grounds for belief. The which none have ever done.

I offer there is a good reason why it's impossible - noting en passant that the Christian God is understood to be incomprehensible and unknowable - for there to be zero evidence for any modern g/God. Because once known as a matter of knowledge, then no longer any sort of g/God.

The mystery is sine qua non of religious belief, hence no evidence, Hence no material existence.

Since when does not proving something isn't true justify that the thing is? — InPitzotl

If you can't prove your own statements why would anyone take them seriously?

If you can't prove your own statements why would anyone take them seriously? — Apollodorus

Exactly.

A-theists simply state that they find not only too many problems with g/God stories, but also zero evidence for the real, material existence of any g/God. They may draw from that the conclusion that no such g/God exists, and this an essentially reasonable conclusion. — tim wood

That isn't always the case. Some atheists may start from a feeling of superiority or, as I said, from fear. Not all atheists are the same.

But I do think he's got some serious issues there. It isn't unheard off for those with certain issues to take up the study of psychology. Perhaps in an attempt to self-treat themselves? Maybe he can tell us more himself if he can muster the cour — Apollodorus

I agree . In life more often than not we find these things to be self-evident.

In logic, any atheist who posits God does not exist has the precarious an untenable position of defending his/that proposition.

The most prudent thing an atheist could do is to say nothing. Otherwise, he has essentially endorsed another belief system.