Why do men reject God?

RWNJ

Gold Member
Oct 22, 2015
4,287
639
275
I believe this guy nailed it. In fact. I once asked the question...If there was proof that God was real, would you worship Him? Most people said no, and gave reasons similar to the ones in the OP. As you can see, disbelief is not the result of rational thought, but emotion.

by Wayne Jackson
Most people in the world, throughout the ages of history, have believed in some concept of a Supreme Being. They may have had a perverted sense of Who that Being is, but they were convinced that there is a Personal Power greater than man. Given the evidence available, faith is reasonable. That is why the psalmist declared: “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1). The Hebrew word for “fool” suggests one who is not thinking rationally.

Since unbelief is neither reasonable nor the norm, one cannot but wonder why some people become atheists. I am convinced, after reflecting upon the matter for many years, that religious disbelief does not result from logical conclusions based on well-researched data. Rather, generally speaking, emotional motivation of some sort is a primary causative factor.

Consider the following case. In 1996, Judith Hayes, a senior writer for The American Rationalist, authored a caustic, atheistic tirade titled: In God We Trust: But Which One? In this treatise, Mrs. Hayes revealed two clues as to why she left the Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) and became an atheist.

As a youngster, she had a friend who was a Buddhist. Judith was very close to “Susan,” and she simply could not tolerate the idea that her friend, who did not accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, might be lost apart from the biblical redemptive system.

So, rather than carefully examining the evidence to determine whether or not the claims of the Lord (as set forth in the New Testament record — see John 14:6; Acts 4:12) are true, she simply decided, on an emotional and reactionary basis, that Christianity could not be genuine.

Eventually Judith married, but the relationship degenerated. Mrs. Hayes claims her husband was verbally abusive. Again, though, instead of considering the possibility that she might have been responsible for having made a bad choice in her marital selection, or that her husband decided on his own volition to be abusive (in direct violation of divine teaching — Ephesians 5:25ff), she blamed God for her disappointment.

“[H]ow could I possibly have wound up married to a tyrant? Why had God forsaken me?,” she wrote (1996, p. 15). God did not forsake her. He honored her freedom of choice, and that of her husband as well. Human abuse of that freedom is not the Lord’s responsibility.

The infidel William Ernest Henley (1849-1903) was known principally for his skeptical poem, Invictus. As a youngster, Henley contracted tuberculosis, and had to have one foot amputated. He suffered much across the years and became quite bitter. He wrote:

In the fell clutch of circumstanceI have not winced or cried aloud.Under the bludgeonings of chance,
my head is bloody, but unbowed.

His disbelief, however, was emotional, not intellectual.

The late Isaac Asimov once wrote: “Emotionally I am an atheist. I don’t have the evidence to prove that God doesn’t exist, but I so strongly suspect that he doesn’t that I don’t want to waste my time” (1982, pp. 6-10, emp. added).

In one of his books, Aldous Huxley acknowledged that he had reasons for “not wanting the world to have a meaning.” He contended that the “philosophy of meaningless” was liberating. He confessed that the morality of theism interfered “with our sexual freedom” (1966, p. 19). This is hardly a valid argument for rejecting the vast array of evidence that testifies to the existence of a Supreme Being!

Here is an important point. When men have motives for resisting faith in God, and when — out of personal prejudice — they are predisposed to reject the Creator, they become “ripe” for philosophical skepticism.
 
Nobody rejects "God". What people reject is the arrogance of con artists who contrive the concept "God" and then run around selling it. Especially under pain of torture.
 
I suspect many who call themselves atheists just feel that they don't have any proof. Provide the proof, maybe they'll believe.

Nothing unreasonable about that. They're just being honest.

There are also "anti-Theists" (such as the late, great Christopher Hitchens), whose primary beef is with organized religion. Which, admittedly, is a pretty easy target.
.
 
I believe this guy nailed it. In fact. I once asked the question...If there was proof that God was real, would you worship Him? Most people said no, and gave reasons similar to the ones in the OP. As you can see, disbelief is not the result of rational thought, but emotion.

by Wayne Jackson
Most people in the world, throughout the ages of history, have believed in some concept of a Supreme Being. They may have had a perverted sense of Who that Being is, but they were convinced that there is a Personal Power greater than man. Given the evidence available, faith is reasonable. That is why the psalmist declared: “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1). The Hebrew word for “fool” suggests one who is not thinking rationally.

Since unbelief is neither reasonable nor the norm, one cannot but wonder why some people become atheists. I am convinced, after reflecting upon the matter for many years, that religious disbelief does not result from logical conclusions based on well-researched data. Rather, generally speaking, emotional motivation of some sort is a primary causative factor.

Consider the following case. In 1996, Judith Hayes, a senior writer for The American Rationalist, authored a caustic, atheistic tirade titled: In God We Trust: But Which One? In this treatise, Mrs. Hayes revealed two clues as to why she left the Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) and became an atheist.

As a youngster, she had a friend who was a Buddhist. Judith was very close to “Susan,” and she simply could not tolerate the idea that her friend, who did not accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, might be lost apart from the biblical redemptive system.

So, rather than carefully examining the evidence to determine whether or not the claims of the Lord (as set forth in the New Testament record — see John 14:6; Acts 4:12) are true, she simply decided, on an emotional and reactionary basis, that Christianity could not be genuine.

Eventually Judith married, but the relationship degenerated. Mrs. Hayes claims her husband was verbally abusive. Again, though, instead of considering the possibility that she might have been responsible for having made a bad choice in her marital selection, or that her husband decided on his own volition to be abusive (in direct violation of divine teaching — Ephesians 5:25ff), she blamed God for her disappointment.

“[H]ow could I possibly have wound up married to a tyrant? Why had God forsaken me?,” she wrote (1996, p. 15). God did not forsake her. He honored her freedom of choice, and that of her husband as well. Human abuse of that freedom is not the Lord’s responsibility.

The infidel William Ernest Henley (1849-1903) was known principally for his skeptical poem, Invictus. As a youngster, Henley contracted tuberculosis, and had to have one foot amputated. He suffered much across the years and became quite bitter. He wrote:

In the fell clutch of circumstanceI have not winced or cried aloud.Under the bludgeonings of chance,
my head is bloody, but unbowed.

His disbelief, however, was emotional, not intellectual.

The late Isaac Asimov once wrote: “Emotionally I am an atheist. I don’t have the evidence to prove that God doesn’t exist, but I so strongly suspect that he doesn’t that I don’t want to waste my time” (1982, pp. 6-10, emp. added).

In one of his books, Aldous Huxley acknowledged that he had reasons for “not wanting the world to have a meaning.” He contended that the “philosophy of meaningless” was liberating. He confessed that the morality of theism interfered “with our sexual freedom” (1966, p. 19). This is hardly a valid argument for rejecting the vast array of evidence that testifies to the existence of a Supreme Being!

Here is an important point. When men have motives for resisting faith in God, and when — out of personal prejudice — they are predisposed to reject the Creator, they become “ripe” for philosophical skepticism.
out of the night that covers me Remember invictus for the last 50 years
 
I believe this guy nailed it. In fact. I once asked the question...If there was proof that God was real, would you worship Him? Most people said no, and gave reasons similar to the ones in the OP. As you can see, disbelief is not the result of rational thought, but emotion.

by Wayne Jackson
Most people in the world, throughout the ages of history, have believed in some concept of a Supreme Being. They may have had a perverted sense of Who that Being is, but they were convinced that there is a Personal Power greater than man. Given the evidence available, faith is reasonable. That is why the psalmist declared: “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1). The Hebrew word for “fool” suggests one who is not thinking rationally.

Since unbelief is neither reasonable nor the norm, one cannot but wonder why some people become atheists. I am convinced, after reflecting upon the matter for many years, that religious disbelief does not result from logical conclusions based on well-researched data. Rather, generally speaking, emotional motivation of some sort is a primary causative factor.

Consider the following case. In 1996, Judith Hayes, a senior writer for The American Rationalist, authored a caustic, atheistic tirade titled: In God We Trust: But Which One? In this treatise, Mrs. Hayes revealed two clues as to why she left the Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) and became an atheist.

As a youngster, she had a friend who was a Buddhist. Judith was very close to “Susan,” and she simply could not tolerate the idea that her friend, who did not accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, might be lost apart from the biblical redemptive system.

So, rather than carefully examining the evidence to determine whether or not the claims of the Lord (as set forth in the New Testament record — see John 14:6; Acts 4:12) are true, she simply decided, on an emotional and reactionary basis, that Christianity could not be genuine.

Eventually Judith married, but the relationship degenerated. Mrs. Hayes claims her husband was verbally abusive. Again, though, instead of considering the possibility that she might have been responsible for having made a bad choice in her marital selection, or that her husband decided on his own volition to be abusive (in direct violation of divine teaching — Ephesians 5:25ff), she blamed God for her disappointment.

“[H]ow could I possibly have wound up married to a tyrant? Why had God forsaken me?,” she wrote (1996, p. 15). God did not forsake her. He honored her freedom of choice, and that of her husband as well. Human abuse of that freedom is not the Lord’s responsibility.

The infidel William Ernest Henley (1849-1903) was known principally for his skeptical poem, Invictus. As a youngster, Henley contracted tuberculosis, and had to have one foot amputated. He suffered much across the years and became quite bitter. He wrote:

In the fell clutch of circumstanceI have not winced or cried aloud.Under the bludgeonings of chance,
my head is bloody, but unbowed.

His disbelief, however, was emotional, not intellectual.

The late Isaac Asimov once wrote: “Emotionally I am an atheist. I don’t have the evidence to prove that God doesn’t exist, but I so strongly suspect that he doesn’t that I don’t want to waste my time” (1982, pp. 6-10, emp. added).

In one of his books, Aldous Huxley acknowledged that he had reasons for “not wanting the world to have a meaning.” He contended that the “philosophy of meaningless” was liberating. He confessed that the morality of theism interfered “with our sexual freedom” (1966, p. 19). This is hardly a valid argument for rejecting the vast array of evidence that testifies to the existence of a Supreme Being!

Here is an important point. When men have motives for resisting faith in God, and when — out of personal prejudice — they are predisposed to reject the Creator, they become “ripe” for philosophical skepticism.

I think Mormonism is the best example of why people reject God. They simply want to work or earn becoming one themselves or at least earn the right to Heaven.
 
I'll answer as a recovering Christian

Get your head around religion and faith being mutually exclusive

One can , and often does, reject one for the other

~S~
 
I have to say that god is a man made concept to help contain slaves. The entire book is written by men. And where in the middle east is there people named Mathew, Mark, Luke, or John?
 
I have to say that god is a man made concept to help contain slaves. The entire book is written by men. And where in the middle east is there people named Mathew, Mark, Luke, or John?

The fact that the book proposes a god that is "male" --- without providing a female that makes him male --- that alone tells us the book is writ by men. Men with amazing powers of self-delusion.
 
His sheep heed His voice, His goats do not. Damnation and salvation were both predestined before the beginning of time.
 
I think you mean 'Why do men Reject Religion' which is not the same as rejecting God. That would be Atheism. There are many men who believe in some sort of God like me but do not believe in the Christian model of a vengeful God.
Bingo!

I believe in a divine but do not support any form of Church...
 
All my life, I have seen and heard people who seem to think that they have an exclusive franchise on god. Yet, I have never heard god confirm that. That leads me to the conclusion that god doesn't exist at all.
 
All my life, I have seen and heard people who seem to think that they have an exclusive franchise on god. Yet, I have never heard god confirm that. That leads me to the conclusion that god doesn't exist at all.
Tell me about your search for God and why you decided to abandon it.
 
All my life, I have seen and heard people who seem to think that they have an exclusive franchise on god. Yet, I have never heard god confirm that. That leads me to the conclusion that god doesn't exist at all.


Maybe its just the false image of God in all its forms that many have created through ignorance that does not exist?

When I hear people claim to know all about God, admit they never heard from him, and then say and do stupid things, this doesn't make me conclude that there is no God, this confirms my belief in the existence of God and validates the Bible where it warns that to lie in the name of God leads to death. Some people are just very stupid to doubt that..

I hear what they claim, I see what they do, I feel the pain and torment of their confusion and am astonished at their obstinate refusal to leave the discomfit of the grave and evolve as human beings are supposed to as if they are quite literally dead, incapable of affirmative action, even to save their own lives or the lives of their children, gibbering incoherently about being saved, the end of the world, paradise, judgement day and hell, in a complete panic that Jesus is coming, as life itself passes them by and they slowly degenerate into nothingness.

I believe in a God who is not edible, cannot be equally divided into three and never became a man because he opened my eyes to see the overwhelming evidence that his laws remain in effect and are in full force every single day....

Do not be misled. Rejecting what the insane claim about God is not rejecting God it is refusing to eat human dung.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top