Atheist Discussion Thread

[Pathfinder]

58 minutes ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

To that second paragraph, I know none of the words, lol.

So apologetics is the argument or justification for a thing, usually a religious doctrine. The quote you referenced is a rather old and popular issue with religion and there have been various apologetics in response to it, with their own issues as well. My issue with apologetics is it always feels like they recognize there is a problem, but then try and come up with all these "buts", "ands", and "ifs" in an effort to validate it and thereby "make it ok". For myself, the lengths some apologetics go through makes me very uncomfortable and in some cases makes the whole thing 100 times worse. I only mentioned it because I thought that was what you were referring to by bringing up that quote. I could explain more if you like but I'll spoiler it and keep to only this instance so as not to go off on a tangent and only if you are curious. Thank you for asking!

 

Edit: hopefully I did an ok job explaining. If anything was confusing or overly vague, please feel free to ask

Edited February 21 by Pathfinder

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

5 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

So apologetics is the argument or justification for a thing, usually a religious doctrine. The quote you referenced is a rather old and popular issue with religion and there have been various apologetics in response to it, with their own issues as well. My issue with apologetics is it always feels like they recognize there is a problem, but then try and come up with all these "buts", "ands", and "ifs" in an effort to validate it and thereby "make it ok". For myself, the lengths some apologetics go through makes me very uncomfortable and in some cases makes the whole thing 100 times worse. I only mentioned it because I thought that was what you were referring to by bringing up that quote. I could explain more if you like but I'll spoiler it and keep to only this instance so as not to go off on a tangent and only if you are curious. Thank you for asking!

 

Edit: hopefully I did an ok job explaining. If anything was confusing or overly vague, please feel free to ask

That was a good explanation! I did not know that was an old and popular issue, lol. I just found a funny athiest meme and was like 'I know where to share this!'

But please, tell me more *leans in*

[Pathfinder]

On 2/21/2026 at 1:20 AM, CoderDrag0n8 said:

That was a good explanation! I did not know that was an old and popular issue, lol. I just found a funny athiest meme and was like 'I know where to share this!'

But please, tell me more *leans in*

No problem and like I said always happy to spread knowledge. For the sake of brevity I will attempt to focus primarily on that particular quote and try to keep things relatively high level. I do not want to strawman anyone’s beliefs, but if I fully delve into it, I will be writing this forever lol.

Spoiler

So regarding the quote. It raises many, many issues but I will stick with the primary one right out of the gate, how to attain salvation. I am not even touching the natures of heaven and hell, why they are the way they are, and how they function. The only part of this quote I am commenting on is how you are saved. A number of the references I will provide will tend towards christianity as the quote does mention a missionary, but they do apply to other religions as well. I am not intending to pick on christianity nor single it out. Just providing the context of the quote.

In the quote you have an individual that never heard of the missionary’s god, never heard the doctrine, the holy days, or the rules. Had the missionary never showed, the individual would have been born, grown up, potentially had a family, taught his or her children whatever he or she was taught, grown old and died all in accordance with his or her own beliefs. If according to this quote, in order for this individual to be saved, they have to know god and not have sinned, then what happens to the individual if they never met the missionary? This quote seems to imply a form of belief that indicates knowledge of it equals requirement. If you know the “rules”, then you have to follow them, or else hell. Does that mean without the knowledge the individual is automatically saved? So had he or she never heard of this god, they automatically would have gone to heaven? Or been safe? Or whatever this belief structure considers what being saved is? We don’t know because the quote leaves this open. It does not say what being saved means, only what it means if you are not. 

This raises some ethical as well as structural concerns. If we absolutely steelman the missionary, then to them, their religion is a very real thing. The consequences of not following their religion are very real. So if they genuinely are a good person, then meeting someone without trying to convert them is damning them to hell. The missionary wouldn’t want to hurt someone, they just want to help them. So it is a moral imperative to convert them. But if the idea is that by not knowing, the individual automatically has salvation, then is it ethical for the missionary to educate the individual, thereby potentially damning them? In this case, conversion could actually be the greatest harm the missionary could inflict on the individual. Then there is the structural issue. If god is real, created us all, knows everything about us before we even came into existence, and everything is according to its plan then why is it possible for someone to be born, grow up, live and die all without ever knowing it existed? 

I will now mention some ways apologetics deal with this (and this is by no means exhaustive nor extensive. Like I said, brevity). One is by referencing a bible passage that essentially says if you follow the law regardless whether you know of it or not, you will be justified by the law. So it argues the knowledge itself does not determine whether or not you are saved, just so long as you still do it. This works so long as the law details things you could reasonably do without knowledge of the law. So the whole not killing people willy nilly. That is fine, but there are laws that require certain practices that there is no way the individual could know without being told. There are laws that are even counterintuitive. So it still becomes an issue of following laws that the individual has no knowledge of. Does the individual get partial credit? How much does that partial credit count for? Another apologetic deals with another aspect of this quote. If the missionary’s religion was christianity, and if the requirement was accepting jesus, then what happened to all the people that were born, lived, and died before jesus supposedly existed? So this apologetic basically says when jesus did his resurrection, he also stopped by hell so everyone had a chance to know him and then be saved. The problem with that is how is it ok that those people had to be in hell up until that point just because they didn’t know? Yet another apologetic argues that while jesus went to hell, he also did a world tour, so it was not only the Middle East that got to know about him, but the Americas and so on. The issue with that is there are still other places that were not mentioned, so why were they excluded? Now again, I did a very rough, and quick mention of these apologetics due to length, and there are still many many MANY others that I have not mentioned, but there is still a main issue with all of these. If this was all designed by an all powerful, all knowing, all good god, then why was this issue baked in to begin with? Even that has apologetics for it, and one I particulary dislike is that god’s plan is ineffable. Basically we are mere mortals and we have no way to know or understand the machinations of a being that is so high above us. So even if the plan doesn’t make sense and in some cases seems downright damaging, its actually perfect and don’t worry about it. 

This quote can’t even be said to only be valid in the past when the world was still being discovered so there was feasibly places that no one has seen before. To this very day there is an island with a tribe of people who have never known the outside world. The government of the country that has jurisdiction over the island ruled for its conservation and to leave the native inhabitants alone. By law no one is to approach the island or attempt to interact with them for the safety of outsiders and the tribe. A modern day missionary found a way to get a boat by themselves and get on the island to convert the tribe. The local inhabitants shot arrows at the missionary, killing him. Was it ethical for the missionary to break the law, potentially infect the tribe with pathogens they never experienced, all to bring them salvation? Is it ethical to leave the tribe isolated when there are medicines, and technology that can clearly improve their quality of life? Is it ethical to leave them isolated when that could very well be dooming them to a lack of genetic diversity and ultimately dying out? These are very hard and divisive questions. I have yet to find an apologetic in response to these concerns that would satisfy me or any other concerns or issues. 

At the end of the day though, you do not have to know anything about apologetics nor agree with my view of them to be an atheist. I could have not written a reply or any of this and your understanding/view is completely valid. You could not care about a single thing I wrote and I would be completely fine and supportive of that. Finally all I wrote is not what every atheist thinks. It is just what I think as an atheist based on what I have seen and read. Hope this post has been in some way helpful! 

Edit: Sorry, re-read your intro post, so all of what I said above but can switch atheist to agnostic if you feel that fits you better. Thanks!

Edited February 22 by Pathfinder

[Hmmm lies she/her]

Ooh I have so many interesting things to say but I don't have time rn. Posting this so that I remember to do so later.

[Pathfinder]

I would like to leave space for @Hmmm lies to reply whenever and however she wishes, but in the meantime I saw an interesting reel that I thought to share.

Basically the reel says that neurodivent individuals are less likely to be religious due to less "mentalizing", a preference for logic over faith, and a higher sensitivity to social pressures. Out of curiosity I looked into it and it seems there is a study that backs the claim. To be clear neither myself nor the study are claiming that if you are neurodivergent, you are automatically not religious. Just there seems a potential disposition towards being irreligous. 

I myself am AuDHD and its rings true to myself, but I am not representative of all neurodivergence nor all irreligous individuals. So I was just curious if any other atheists who may also be neurodivergent (if comfortable with sharing) had any thoughts or lived in experiences. I have plenty of my own but wanted to hear others out first.

[Hmmm lies she/her]

2 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

I would like to leave space for @Hmmm lies to reply whenever and however she wishes, but in the meantime I saw an interesting reel that I thought to share.

Basically the reel says that neurodivent individuals are less likely to be religious due to less "mentalizing", a preference for logic over faith, and a higher sensitivity to social pressures. Out of curiosity I looked into it and it seems there is a study that backs the claim. To be clear neither myself nor the study are claiming that if you are neurodivergent, you are automatically not religious. Just there seems a potential disposition towards being irreligous. 

I myself am AuDHD and its rings true to myself, but I am not representative of all neurodivergence nor all irreligous individuals. So I was just curious if any other atheists who may also be neurodivergent (if comfortable with sharing) had any thoughts or lived in experiences. I have plenty of my own but wanted to hear others out first.

Hmmm? I mean, I don't intend on giving my multi-paragraph essay any time soon, just cause of how much stuff I have to do, so post here all you want, but I'll look at this. (am autistic)

...

Yeah this seems legit, I believe it. Neurodivergence often puts me at odds with societal norms, and religion is a pretty big societal norm.

That "mentalizing" thing seems right. (do you mean lower sensitivity to social pressures?) I remember being like 6 or 7 years old at Passover, I think, and just thinking "wait do they actually believe this? But like... none of this is possible, right?" This was pretty much the first thing I can remember of me thinking about religion critically.

Edited March 2 by Hmmm lies

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

9 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

I would like to leave space for @Hmmm lies to reply whenever and however she wishes, but in the meantime I saw an interesting reel that I thought to share.

Basically the reel says that neurodivent individuals are less likely to be religious due to less "mentalizing", a preference for logic over faith, and a higher sensitivity to social pressures. Out of curiosity I looked into it and it seems there is a study that backs the claim. To be clear neither myself nor the study are claiming that if you are neurodivergent, you are automatically not religious. Just there seems a potential disposition towards being irreligous. 

I myself am AuDHD and its rings true to myself, but I am not representative of all neurodivergence nor all irreligous individuals. So I was just curious if any other atheists who may also be neurodivergent (if comfortable with sharing) had any thoughts or lived in experiences. I have plenty of my own but wanted to hear others out first.

Im adhd and ocd

9 hours ago, Hmmm lies said:

6 or 7

hisssssssssssss

[Pathfinder]

On 3/2/2026 at 10:37 AM, Hmmm lies said:

Hmmm? I mean, I don't intend on giving my multi-paragraph essay any time soon, just cause of how much stuff I have to do, so post here all you want, but I'll look at this. (am autistic)

...

Yeah this seems legit, I believe it. Neurodivergence often puts me at odds with societal norms, and religion is a pretty big societal norm.

That "mentalizing" thing seems right. (do you mean lower sensitivity to social pressures?) I remember being like 6 or 7 years old at Passover, I think, and just thinking "wait do they actually believe this? But like... none of this is possible, right?" This was pretty much the first thing I can remember of me thinking about religion critically.

No problem @Hmmm lies! I didn’t want to turn this thread into about me, so I wanted to leave space for you to however and whenever you feel you are ready to contribute. Basically I didn’t want to change the subject and you feel like I shut you down. But then again I do tend to over explain myself in an effort to avoid misunderstandings, and then get misunderstood anyway so I guess what can you do right? Lol

I believe what was meant by higher sensitivity is a higher rate of resistance or reaction. So for instance, you might say someone with an allergy to cat hair might have a higher sensitivity to cat hair. The skin breaks out, and wheezing occurs. I think it means a lower sensitivity could mean a higher rate of adoption or acceptance of perceived social mores. 

On 3/2/2026 at 8:13 PM, Through The Living Coder said:

Im adhd and ocd

hisssssssssssss

Thank you for your contribution @Through The Living Coder!

 

So again in an effort to not have this be about me speaking about my own atheistism, I will share my sister-in-law’s story (that she gave me permission to share)

My sister-in-law is autistic. She told me that her mother said to her when she was younger that “honor thy father and mother” meant that if she lied to her mother, she would go to hell. My sister-in-law took this literally and thought that if she potentially lied to her mother (lie of omission, white lie, or even the truth but could be perceived as a lie) the ground would literally open up and drag her down to hell. So as result she told her mother everything. And I do mean EVERYTHING. Even down to forgetting to brush her teeth at a specific time. Her mother got annoyed with all the specificity and would snap at her. Then one day, my sister-in-law didn’t have a chance to “confess” to her mother and fully expected to be dragged down to hell in that moment, only to realize nothing happened. This confused her, and made her begin to question what else her mother would say regarding religion. Thankfully she is now living with myself and my wife, but that is just once instance that she confided in us regarding her mother and religion.

Edited March 5 by Pathfinder

[Hmmm lies she/her]

On 2/23/2026 at 11:08 PM, Hmmm lies said:

Ooh I have so many interesting things to say but I don't have time rn. Posting this so that I remember to do so later.

So, there are a lot of things I have to say, but so many have already been said, or will be said. So I'm going to share one of my especially controversial viewpoints.

A common argument I see is that religious beliefs are fine, so long as people don't try to force them on others. (I'm going to use not being gay as my example, feel free to replace it with anything in your mind) So like it's fine for a person to believe they shouldn't be gay, but not for them to try and force other people not to be gay. However, there's a few issues with this in my opinion. First, what constitutes forcing beliefs on others? Religion is often passed down in families, and the children will typically end up taking on their parents religion. It's not because they looked at all the options and chose what worked for them best, it's because this is what their parents said.

And then my even more radical opinion: Even keeping one's beliefs to oneself is harmful. For example, if someone is attracted to their own gender, but choosing not to act on these desires, I think they're harming themselves. They're depriving themself of joy for (in my opinion) no reason.

This is pretty barebones, but it's late and I'm tired, y'all can ask for any more insights or clarification if you wish.

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

17 minutes ago, Hmmm lies said:

So, there are a lot of things I have to say, but so many have already been said, or will be said. So I'm going to share one of my especially controversial viewpoints.

A common argument I see is that religious beliefs are fine, so long as people don't try to force them on others. (I'm going to use not being gay as my example, feel free to replace it with anything in your mind) So like it's fine for a person to believe they shouldn't be gay, but not for them to try and force other people not to be gay. However, there's a few issues with this in my opinion. First, what constitutes forcing beliefs on others? Religion is often passed down in families, and the children will typically end up taking on their parents religion. It's not because they looked at all the options and chose what worked for them best, it's because this is what their parents said.

And then my even more radical opinion: Even keeping one's beliefs to oneself is harmful. For example, if someone is attracted to their own gender, but choosing not to act on these desires, I think they're harming themselves. They're depriving themself of joy for (in my opinion) no reason.

This is pretty barebones, but it's late and I'm tired, y'all can ask for any more insights or clarification if you wish.

My personal opinion is this:

There are 3 types of religons. Toxic religons, Religons, and Cults.

A religon can be a Toxic Cult, but I digress.

A Toxic Religon is one that forces their beliefs on others. I find this to be bad, and well, Toxic.

A Cult is a harmful religon that harms the practicioner. If a person is gay, and their religon condems gays, I think an arguement could be made that, under these definitions, it would be a cult.

And a Toxic Cult is the worst possible one, as it forces harmful beliefs.

An example of a Toxic religon is Theoretical Christianity. (I say theoretical because in practice, christianity can be harmful but oh god am I not going down that rabbit hole on the Fansite of a mormon author) Theoretical Christianity teaches many good things. I love my neighbors. I shal not steal. But it tries to force it's beliefs on others, which makes it Toxic.

This is all very controversal, too.

[Verdance he/him]

28 minutes ago, Through The Living Coder said:

My personal opinion is this:

There are 3 types of religons. Toxic religons, Religons, and Cults.

A religon can be a Toxic Cult, but I digress.

A Toxic Religon is one that forces their beliefs on others. I find this to be bad, and well, Toxic.

A Cult is a harmful religon that harms the practicioner. If a person is gay, and their religon condems gays, I think an arguement could be made that, under these definitions, it would be a cult.

And a Toxic Cult is the worst possible one, as it forces harmful beliefs.

An example of a Toxic religon is Theoretical Christianity. (I say theoretical because in practice, christianity can be harmful but oh god am I not going down that rabbit hole on the Fansite of a mormon author) Theoretical Christianity teaches many good things. I love my neighbors. I shal not steal. But it tries to force it's beliefs on others, which makes it Toxic.

This is all very controversal, too.

As a christian, if someone says they’re a christian and they force their beliefs on someone, they havent opened their bible. There’s a funny story about sticks and eyeballs that Jesus once told…

but yeah. Religion should make the self better, and the self should make the others better.

When a religion causes harm to the self but conceals or downplays that in any way, thats a cult. 

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

1 hour ago, Through The Living Grass said:

As a christian, if someone says they’re a christian and they force their beliefs on someone, they havent opened their bible. There’s a funny story about sticks and eyeballs that Jesus once told…

but yeah. Religion should make the self better, and the self should make the others better.

When a religion causes harm to the self but conceals or downplays that in any way, thats a cult. 

My bad. Most Christians, then. (Because if that's what you think, I urge you to look outside)

I will say, the internet is very welcoming, and I dont find many Toxic Religons on here, but many religons I find here are usually toxic irl

[Pathfinder]

10 hours ago, Through The Living Grass said:

As a christian, if someone says they’re a christian and they force their beliefs on someone, they havent opened their bible. There’s a funny story about sticks and eyeballs that Jesus once told…

but yeah. Religion should make the self better, and the self should make the others better.

When a religion causes harm to the self but conceals or downplays that in any way, thats a cult. 

Hi @Through The Living Grass! I do appreciate your contribution but I think there are some things that do need to be discussed as result. As this is an atheist discussion thread, I will explain your post through the lense of an atheist (at least this one). You just made a claim espousing your own religion. I respect your belief in your religion. I wish you all the joy and goodness there is to be as you experience and worship your religion. The thing is though, as an atheist (as myself) I disagree with your claim. I have many reasons (and to me quite valid ones) as to why I disagree with your claim.

The most well known and commonly bandied around is the no true Scotman fallacy. But that is not even the main reason for me. My main reasons have a whole lot to do with reading the bible as you indicate. I have read the bible extensively. Now I could explain my reasoning, but I have a pretty good feeling you associate your religion with your identity. And if that is the case, that is totally ok, and again I wish you all the good with that. But that is not so with myself as an atheist. I am concerned that by explaining why your claim does not hold water with me, it will be perceived as attacking your religion, and thereby attacking you. Which I most definitely do not want to do!

As I wrote in my initial post, and then reiterated later in the thread, I meant for this to be a place for atheists to know they are not alone and provide those who are deconstructing resources to do so. Your claim for instance, though I know was meant with openness and support, can actually be very damaging to those going through deconstruction. I do not mean by trying to lead them back to religion, but for very real, and very harmful reasons. I am hesitant to say them here as again, I do not want anyone to feel attacked. All I will say is there was a link I posted at the start of the thread that helps people recover from religion, and it explains that form of harm. If you would like to know more about what I am referring to, I encourage you to check it out and learn more.

Getting back to your post, you are certainly free to post whatever you wish (within reason) and I cannot nor would I want to stop you. However, I can say what I hope will happen. I hope you will take this opportunity to try to learn more about and understand more about atheism. Although there may be some random religion in the some random spot on the planet that I may not have heard of, I can reasonably assure you I have heard of most religions, their arguments, and they do not hold water for me. And what I mean by saying do not hold water, I mean I heard their claims, researched it, and dismissed it based on evidence or lack thereof. I can also say that although it won’t be everyone, a good number of atheists have probably done the same. So it would be reasonable to a degree to conclude I have heard your version of religion, your reasons for believing your religion, and I have not found good cause to agree. I would much rather on an atheist discussion thread, discuss people’s versions of atheism and give them a place to open up about it. Just like there is a lds discussion thread, and a jewish thread, I thought it would be nice for there to be an Atheist thread. 

So at the risk of repeating myself hoping for clarity and probably just muddying the waters further, I hope you will take this chance to learn more about atheism. Not to get you to leave your religion, but to find out something potentially new. Thank you!

 

11 hours ago, Hmmm lies said:

So, there are a lot of things I have to say, but so many have already been said, or will be said. So I'm going to share one of my especially controversial viewpoints.

A common argument I see is that religious beliefs are fine, so long as people don't try to force them on others. (I'm going to use not being gay as my example, feel free to replace it with anything in your mind) So like it's fine for a person to believe they shouldn't be gay, but not for them to try and force other people not to be gay. However, there's a few issues with this in my opinion. First, what constitutes forcing beliefs on others? Religion is often passed down in families, and the children will typically end up taking on their parents religion. It's not because they looked at all the options and chose what worked for them best, it's because this is what their parents said.

And then my even more radical opinion: Even keeping one's beliefs to oneself is harmful. For example, if someone is attracted to their own gender, but choosing not to act on these desires, I think they're harming themselves. They're depriving themself of joy for (in my opinion) no reason.

This is pretty barebones, but it's late and I'm tired, y'all can ask for any more insights or clarification if you wish.

Thank you for sharing @Hmmm lies!

11 hours ago, Through The Living Coder said:

My personal opinion is this:

There are 3 types of religons. Toxic religons, Religons, and Cults.

A religon can be a Toxic Cult, but I digress.

A Toxic Religon is one that forces their beliefs on others. I find this to be bad, and well, Toxic.

A Cult is a harmful religon that harms the practicioner. If a person is gay, and their religon condems gays, I think an arguement could be made that, under these definitions, it would be a cult.

And a Toxic Cult is the worst possible one, as it forces harmful beliefs.

An example of a Toxic religon is Theoretical Christianity. (I say theoretical because in practice, christianity can be harmful but oh god am I not going down that rabbit hole on the Fansite of a mormon author) Theoretical Christianity teaches many good things. I love my neighbors. I shal not steal. But it tries to force it's beliefs on others, which makes it Toxic.

This is all very controversal, too.

Thank you also for sharing @Through The Living Coder!

[Hmmm lies she/her]

Background post cause why not I guess

My mother is Christian, while my father was raised Jewish, but is atheist himself. (Because of this, our family celebrates twice the holidays. Pretty nice actually.) My mother isn't super into Christianity, but my paternal grandparents are still very religious.

I (for whatever reason), went to a Jewish preschool, and they would sometimes tell the story of Passover. I didn't think much of it at the time. It wasn't until I was actually celebrating Passover at my grandparents that I really thought about it (I was probably like 5-7). That was when I was like "Wait... do they actually believe this? Why?" In my mind, it simply did not conform with rational logic. I knew that magic wasn't real, I knew about the concept of gods as a trope. (I had previously learned about the myth of Hades and Persephone, but had assumed that things like that wouldn't be believed anymore, because of scientific knowledge we know now.) So why did they believe that the river could turn to blood, or that a burning bush would speak, or that the Red Sea could part? I simply couldn't comprehend that.

I then assumed, for a little while, that religious belief was a fringe, but still existing phenomenon. After all, my grandparents were old, and I hadn't heard anyone outside of my preschool or my grandparents believing these stories. I, at the time, did not know Easter and Christmas were religious holidays. Eventually though, I found that while my grandparents were more religious than the average person, a huge majority of people were religious.

It was then, or perhaps earlier that I learned about the term "atheist" and applied it to myself.

I was never particularly 'hostile' to religion, even if I did look down on it a little, I figured it wasn't hurting anyone. I'm not sure how I managed to dodge the knowledge of the existence of the Crusades or anything for so long, but when I was around 11-13, I learned that many Christians were homophobic.

Homophobia was something I was wondering about. Previously, I assumed that people just didn't know about/understand the concept of gay people, and that was why they did things like use "gay" as an insult. Still, I was wondering, so I did a Google search. And I was surprised to see that Christianity seemed to be the number one thing mentioned. (It was later I would learn the same was true for the other Abrahamic religions) And then that kinda got me down a whole rabbit hole, and I developed an antitheist attitude from learning about so many issues with religion all at the same time.

And uh yeah there's the story. I surprisingly don't have any religious trauma, but I know some people who do.

Any questions?

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

On 3/10/2026 at 7:58 AM, Hmmm lies said:

Background post cause why not I guess

My mother is Christian, while my father was raised Jewish, but is atheist himself. (Because of this, our family celebrates twice the holidays. Pretty nice actually.) My mother isn't super into Christianity, but my paternal grandparents are still very religious.

I (for whatever reason), went to a Jewish preschool, and they would sometimes tell the story of Passover. I didn't think much of it at the time. It wasn't until I was actually celebrating Passover at my grandparents that I really thought about it (I was probably like 5-7). That was when I was like "Wait... do they actually believe this? Why?" In my mind, it simply did not conform with rational logic. I knew that magic wasn't real, I knew about the concept of gods as a trope. (I had previously learned about the myth of Hades and Persephone, but had assumed that things like that wouldn't be believed anymore, because of scientific knowledge we know now.) So why did they believe that the river could turn to blood, or that a burning bush would speak, or that the Red Sea could part? I simply couldn't comprehend that.

I then assumed, for a little while, that religious belief was a fringe, but still existing phenomenon. After all, my grandparents were old, and I hadn't heard anyone outside of my preschool or my grandparents believing these stories. I, at the time, did not know Easter and Christmas were religious holidays. Eventually though, I found that while my grandparents were more religious than the average person, a huge majority of people were religious.

It was then, or perhaps earlier that I learned about the term "atheist" and applied it to myself.

I was never particularly 'hostile' to religion, even if I did look down on it a little, I figured it wasn't hurting anyone. I'm not sure how I managed to dodge the knowledge of the existence of the Crusades or anything for so long, but when I was around 11-13, I learned that many Christians were homophobic.

Homophobia was something I was wondering about. Previously, I assumed that people just didn't know about/understand the concept of gay people, and that was why they did things like use "gay" as an insult. Still, I was wondering, so I did a Google search. And I was surprised to see that Christianity seemed to be the number one thing mentioned. (It was later I would learn the same was true for the other Abrahamic religions) And then that kinda got me down a whole rabbit hole, and I developed an antitheist attitude from learning about so many issues with religion all at the same time.

And uh yeah there's the story. I surprisingly don't have any religious trauma, but I know some people who do.

Any questions?

Honestly, very similar. Christmakah4ever!

However, I had a bit more of a passive conversion.

During Passover, I felt like I was reading an alt-history fantasy novel.

I just didn’t think about it. I wasn’t like, no way people believe that, and even now, I just kinda accept it. I just accept that some people believe in a story, just so incredibly much that they take a story of questionable truth to be pure truth.

[Ink and Embers Any pronouns]

I'm an Atheist; I was raised in a non-religious family and while I knew a lot of religious people, particularly Christians, when I was younger; due to the strange demographics of where I live the majority of people I regularly interact with are agnostic. (Wow, that sentence had terrible punctuation) My Atheism is less of a kind of logical argument for me and more of "I wasn't raised to believe in higher powers and now I can't". I don't really understand why people believe in God, so it's more that I personally don't believe in Him than I think there's too much evidence He doesn't exist to say otherwise. I didn't grow up having faith and now I find it difficult to imagine. 

[Pathfinder]

On 3/10/2026 at 10:58 AM, Hmmm lies said:

Background post cause why not I guess

My mother is Christian, while my father was raised Jewish, but is atheist himself. (Because of this, our family celebrates twice the holidays. Pretty nice actually.) My mother isn't super into Christianity, but my paternal grandparents are still very religious.

I (for whatever reason), went to a Jewish preschool, and they would sometimes tell the story of Passover. I didn't think much of it at the time. It wasn't until I was actually celebrating Passover at my grandparents that I really thought about it (I was probably like 5-7). That was when I was like "Wait... do they actually believe this? Why?" In my mind, it simply did not conform with rational logic. I knew that magic wasn't real, I knew about the concept of gods as a trope. (I had previously learned about the myth of Hades and Persephone, but had assumed that things like that wouldn't be believed anymore, because of scientific knowledge we know now.) So why did they believe that the river could turn to blood, or that a burning bush would speak, or that the Red Sea could part? I simply couldn't comprehend that.

I then assumed, for a little while, that religious belief was a fringe, but still existing phenomenon. After all, my grandparents were old, and I hadn't heard anyone outside of my preschool or my grandparents believing these stories. I, at the time, did not know Easter and Christmas were religious holidays. Eventually though, I found that while my grandparents were more religious than the average person, a huge majority of people were religious.

It was then, or perhaps earlier that I learned about the term "atheist" and applied it to myself.

I was never particularly 'hostile' to religion, even if I did look down on it a little, I figured it wasn't hurting anyone. I'm not sure how I managed to dodge the knowledge of the existence of the Crusades or anything for so long, but when I was around 11-13, I learned that many Christians were homophobic.

Homophobia was something I was wondering about. Previously, I assumed that people just didn't know about/understand the concept of gay people, and that was why they did things like use "gay" as an insult. Still, I was wondering, so I did a Google search. And I was surprised to see that Christianity seemed to be the number one thing mentioned. (It was later I would learn the same was true for the other Abrahamic religions) And then that kinda got me down a whole rabbit hole, and I developed an antitheist attitude from learning about so many issues with religion all at the same time.

And uh yeah there's the story. I surprisingly don't have any religious trauma, but I know some people who do.

Any questions?

I am glad you have not experienced trauma during your journey. Unfortunately it can be a hard for people coming to terms with their sexuality, their religion, and their family. I hope for the people you know who have gone through religious trauma, that they were able to receive support. If not, the link I posted at the start of the thread might help and I can see about pulling up additional resources. I do find it sadly ironic that gay used to mean happy. I have a number of friends from the whole spectrum of lgbtqia2s+ and when they are seen and treated with respect, they are very happy. It's a shame that people have to add negativity in an effort to exclude and alienate. 

 

[Denissimo He/him]

Hello. I am an Atheist. 
I live as a nihilist and an absurdist. Screw all meaning, I suppose, yet revel in it all the same.
Initially a Christian. Hopped around religions for a bit, trying to find one I thought made sense.
 

Spoiler

I empathise with Sazed in this manner, I suppose.

Buddhist for a while. Converted to Islam for an on-of 2 month duration. A dozen smaller religions entangled into the bunch as well.

How does everyone else here handle death? Being: What are your beliefs regarding it, which I believe are unto themselves a coping mechanism somewhat, and if you believe in eternal oblivion, how do you cope?

[Rynturning_Light She/Her]

9 minutes ago, Denissimo said:

Hello. I am an Atheist. 
I live as a nihilist and an absurdist. Screw all meaning, I suppose, yet revel in it all the same.
Initially a Christian. Hopped around religions for a bit, trying to find one I thought made sense.
 

  Reveal hidden contents

I empathise with Sazed in this manner, I suppose.

Buddhist for a while. Converted to Islam for an on-of 2 month duration. A dozen smaller religions entangled into the bunch as well.

How does everyone else here handle death? Being: What are your beliefs regarding it, which I believe are unto themselves a coping mechanism somewhat, and if you believe in eternal oblivion, how do you cope?

Hello! And welcome

My personal beliefs regarding death are basically just the principle that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

We are energized beings. We use it to live and think. I think that, because energy cannot be destroyed, when we die it returns to the world around us in other forms. Usually throw the decomposition process in there, and we become energy to power other organisms

Some of my (also atheist) family members think that our energy gets released into the universe and like rejoins the cosmic energy cycle

Don’t know if it’s truly a coping mechanism. I just kinda accept that it will happen and that an end will come. 

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

12 hours ago, Denissimo said:

Hello. I am an Atheist. 
I live as a nihilist and an absurdist. Screw all meaning, I suppose, yet revel in it all the same.
Initially a Christian. Hopped around religions for a bit, trying to find one I thought made sense.
 

  Reveal hidden contents

I empathise with Sazed in this manner, I suppose.

Buddhist for a while. Converted to Islam for an on-of 2 month duration. A dozen smaller religions entangled into the bunch as well.

How does everyone else here handle death? Being: What are your beliefs regarding it, which I believe are unto themselves a coping mechanism somewhat, and if you believe in eternal oblivion, how do you cope?

Well

I don't think about it much. I believe an afterlife is merely a fancy little fantasy constructed to make people feel better about the cruel reality of death.

As for how I cope with eternal oblivion, at least its better than that one SCP Story I read. It haunts me while I am awake. IT HAUNTS MEEEE

I mostly struggle with fate v free will which I have neatly resolved with either 'it doesn't matter' or 'if quantum physics can do it, I can too'

[Denissimo He/him]

14 hours ago, Rynturning_Light said:

Hello! And welcome

My personal beliefs regarding death are basically just the principle that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

We are energized beings. We use it to live and think. I think that, because energy cannot be destroyed, when we die it returns to the world around us in other forms. Usually throw the decomposition process in there, and we become energy to power other organisms

Some of my (also atheist) family members think that our energy gets released into the universe and like rejoins the cosmic energy cycle

Don’t know if it’s truly a coping mechanism. I just kinda accept that it will happen and that an end will come. 

A nice thought, certainly. However, i often avoid such thoughts. as I see them as avoiding the problem: At no point do you actually address the question of conciousness.

2 hours ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

Well

I don't think about it much. I believe an afterlife is merely a fancy little fantasy constructed to make people feel better about the cruel reality of death.

As for how I cope with eternal oblivion, at least its better than that one SCP Story I read. It haunts me while I am awake. IT HAUNTS MEEEE

I mostly struggle with fate v free will which I have neatly resolved with either 'it doesn't matter' or 'if quantum physics can do it, I can too'

I agree with your view on the afterlife. I believe it to be a tool for power as well: Religions always introduce some concept of the "Afterlife", and set requirements for achieving a certain kind of Afterlife. In this manner, religion is a socially constructed tool for controlling the masses: If you disobey these laws, or the ordainances of this church, you go to hell for all eternity. That is the deterrent.

Death haunts you while awake? If that is what you are saying, I can relate. 

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

1 minute ago, Denissimo said:

A nice thought, certainly. However, i often avoid such thoughts. as I see them as avoiding the problem: At no point do you actually address the question of conciousness.

I agree with your view on the afterlife. I believe it to be a tool for power as well: Religions always introduce some concept of the "Afterlife", and set requirements for achieving a certain kind of Afterlife. In this manner, religion is a socially constructed tool for controlling the masses: If you disobey these laws, or the ordainances of this church, you go to hell for all eternity. That is the deterrent.

Death haunts you while awake? If that is what you are saying, I can relate. 

nah this SCP story that proposed after death you can still feel all the pain you would normally be able to feel, and your consciousness never fades. It's storming terrifying.

I find that either the religion genuinely does believe that all good people go to the 'good afterlife' and bad people go to the 'bad afterlife' or they use some convaluted justification for why our believers go to the good one, non-believers go to the bad one. Or they just forgo the afterlife entirely (judaism my goat (fun fact: christians made up the afterlife, and most angels))

[Denissimo He/him]

3 hours ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

nah this SCP story that proposed after death you can still feel all the pain you would normally be able to feel, and your consciousness never fades. It's storming terrifying.

I find that either the religion genuinely does believe that all good people go to the 'good afterlife' and bad people go to the 'bad afterlife' or they use some convaluted justification for why our believers go to the good one, non-believers go to the bad one. Or they just forgo the afterlife entirely (judaism my goat (fun fact: christians made up the afterlife, and most angels))

Well, Judaism doesn't entirely forgo an afterlife. The HaOlam haBa, or the World to Come, is an important aspect of Judaism. I'm not sure whether the Christians definitively "made up" afterlife in Judaism, but I doubt so. Going even farther back, early israelite texts refer to the Sheol, a shadowy place where but the righteous and malevolent souls go to rest, which can be considered an Afterlife.

[Honors Spectral Image She/her]

23 hours ago, Denissimo said:

Hello. I am an Atheist. 
I live as a nihilist and an absurdist. Screw all meaning, I suppose, yet revel in it all the same.
Initially a Christian. Hopped around religions for a bit, trying to find one I thought made sense.
 

  Hide contents

I empathise with Sazed in this manner, I suppose.

Buddhist for a while. Converted to Islam for an on-of 2 month duration. A dozen smaller religions entangled into the bunch as well.

How does everyone else here handle death? Being: What are your beliefs regarding it, which I believe are unto themselves a coping mechanism somewhat, and if you believe in eternal oblivion, how do you cope?

Heyyyyy welcome back, as an atheist I kinda just view it as something that happens, I don’t look forward to it but u also don’t dread it, I also try to understand that I could die any day and so I try to act like today’s my last day every day, it’s kinda the same as waking up to me lol it just happens whether I want it too or not

i will say (and I sincerely doubt this is what happens bc it makes no sense lol) that if you retained consciousness for eternity after death but could see hear or feel anything but you knew you couldn’t do those things, that scares me when I think abt it, but again that’s delving a little bit into like fantasy lol

[CoderDrag0n8 He/They]

7 hours ago, Denissimo said:

Well, Judaism doesn't entirely forgo an afterlife. The HaOlam haBa, or the World to Come, is an important aspect of Judaism. I'm not sure whether the Christians definitively "made up" afterlife in Judaism, but I doubt so. Going even farther back, early israelite texts refer to the Sheol, a shadowy place where but the righteous and malevolent souls go to rest, which can be considered an Afterlife.

Well, in general, Judaism doesn't have any specific afterlife stuff, just general, God's got somethin, but Christians definitely made up the 'this is heaven with god and believers, and this is hell with satan and non-believers'