Why Do Theists Think that Atheists Are in Denial?
Sunday July 2, 2006
A common misconception or misunderstanding which many Christians have about atheism is that atheists "really" believe in God, but are in denial about this fact. Atheists say that they don't believe, but they really do and only say they don't because they are angry at God, they don't want to admit that they sin, or for some other bizarre reason. This seems nonsensical, so why do people insist on it?
A reader offers this suggestion:
In one of your mailbag articles, you express bafflement at the proliferation of the myth among theists that atheists are "in denial". I actually have my own theory about that which I'd like to share with you. You may or may not agree my idea, but I figured you wouldn't mind the suggestion anyways.
Recently I read an interesting article on Scientology from Rolling Stone magazine. One of the things that caught my eye in this article was the following quote:
"Many kids who've grown up in Scientology describe it as Natalie did: "a bubble" that exists in tandem with the mainstream world. "It's impossible to understand it unless you've lived it," says Paul.
Even when you've lived it, as one young woman notes, it's hard to fully understand. This twenty-two-year-old, whom we'll call Sara, left Scientology in high school. After leaving, she and a friend who quit with her sat down with a dictionary. "We looked up all the words we used [because] we didn't know if we were speaking English or not," she says.
Hubbard created Scientology's language to be unique to its members. It includes words that are interpretations, or variations, of standard terms"
It made me wonder if this linguistic bubble is something unique to Scientology, or if other religions also practice this form of isolation, creating a language, redefining words, so that their adherents are essentially speaking a language unique to the religion. Oftentimes in debates with theists whom I consider to be very intelligent, we'll run up against a wall at a certain point where it doesn't seem like we're communicating. I began to wonder if, perhaps, we are speaking a "different" language, in that what a word means to me (I was raised fundamentalist Christian but left the religion during college, and now consider myself agnostic) are different than what they mean to someone who is a staunch and long-time follower of a religion.
Anyways, your article on the myth of atheist "denial" reminded me of this. In the Bible, "knowledge" is defined in terms of revelation from God. "Reason" and "rationality", while not explicitly discussed in the Bible, have been defined by Christian theologians as a supernatural manifestation of the Imago Dei. That is, Reason is something apart from Flesh, something reflecting the spirit of God.
So, hypothetically, someone who speaks "Christianese" would approach someone who claims to rely on Knowledge and Reason, but doesn't believe in God, as a liar, because according to him (and everything he's ever learned) knowledge and reason both necessitate God--God is part of the very definition of the words for a Christian. Therefore, an atheist who claims to be relying on knowledge and reason is a liar. All because the religion to which this theist adheres has so defined those words in a strictly theological sense. [emphasis added]
Anyways, I don't know what you'll think of that theory. I'm not 100% sure of it myself--it's just something I've been thinking about. And it may or may not apply to "Jona". Maybe Jona's problem really is psychological. Maybe Jona's just regurgitating arguments from others. Maybe Jona's just plain stupid. But those myths Jona is using will also be perpetuated by theists who are otherwise very intelligent people, and the language thing has seemed to me to be a possible explanation for why an otherwise intelligent person might fall into this kind of uncritical thinking.
This explanation for what is an otherwise bizarre and nonsensical claim appears to fit the evidence and also appears to be internally consistent, so we should take it seriously. One possible problem with it is the obvious fact that not every Christian believes that atheists are in denial, but most (if not all) Christian denominations probably agree that Reason comes from God. How can this be? What would cause one Christian to infer from this that atheists are lying and/or in denial, but not cause the same inference in another Christian?
If the above explanation is correct, then, there must be something in addition going on — perhaps this belief only occurs with particular groups that really emphasize the idea that Reason comes from God?
Understanding Atheism & Atheists:
Comments
I do som posting on Christian forums, and I see statements very similar to this come up fairly often, so I’m inclined to support this particular theory.
Somewhat related to this theory is a quote I once read that was attributed to Maddalyn O´hare. To paraphrase, she said the religious must deny atheism as real because it represents the threat of doubt in their own minds.
When I explained to an old friend that I had become an Atheist she declared I was angry with god. A presupositionalist who I spoke to about an extreme “Calvanist” statement in his sermon (I still take my mother to church) kept saying that I could not be talking to him without relying on his presupositions. (We corresponded for a while by email and I never got him to explain which presupositions I was relying on.) There is a precedent in the Bible. In Romans chapter 1 there is the declaration that unbelievers are effectively in denial because the exsistence of god is plainly apparent to everyone[Romans 1:19]. Even without these verses this idea would be needed as Theists have to see their worldview as the only valid truth. The only alternative to denial is that the unbeliever is blinded to the truth, by satan or whaterver, but once they have explained their “gospel” you must then be in denial.
Actually, I heavily disagree. I hate god. Pisses me off. I don’t logically believe in him, no, but emotionally? Well, I certainly don’t talk to him anymore, or imagine him, but deep in the back of your head whenever you hear about him you just think ‘***!’ or something like that. It’s a stage all atheists who were born and raised religious go through in freeing their minds, I think.
It doesn’t make you in denial, but it’s easy to see how that might be misconstrued. Basically, if you were told for a long time that an idea was real, a person, and even today people speak like they’re real, you think of them like a person. I don’t believe that Lisa Simpson is real, but I still like her.
Having feelings towards fictional characters doesn’t mean you literally believe they’re real.
I think the problem is a warped understanding of epistemology, and the double-standard this can lead too. I was startled a few weeks ago when my mom said that i believe that atheism is true, but she knows that Catholicism is true. She was very clear about this asymetry.
A reasonable theist will understand that an atheist can use reason and logic and not realize that these tools come from God. The difference between theists who claim atheists are in denial and theists who don’t is in how clearly they understand knowledge and, ironically, reason and logic–at least when the topic is their own religion.
This topic has given me some insight into my mom’s reasoning. She insists that i’m a theist in denial. I don’t know why she thinks so, but my best guess is wishful thinking. But i contrast her to myself during my theist days, and the epistemology pattern fits. I never second-guessed any atheists i had met, but i also believed–unlike my mom (at least in regards to her own religion)–that faith meant never knowing for sure.