Aren't you just rebelling against God because you want to sin?

No. We don't believe in a god, nor do we believe in sin (which is usually defined as not adhering to the god's wishes). We aren't rebelling against God anymore than we are rebelling against Santa Claus.

Do you not believe in Zeus because you're actually rebelling against him? How about Odin, Thor or Krishna? Like most people, you don't believe in these gods because you aren't convinced they are real, not because there's some rules of theirs you don't like, and somehow trying to pretend they don't exist frees you from them. It would be silly to think I could exempt myself from Nigeria law by pretending that the Nigeria does not exist.

We don't believe in a god because we haven't
received sufficient, good-quality evidence that one exists.

A significant overlap does exist between what a religious person would consider a "sin", and what an atheist would consider "bad". For instance, most atheists would be opposed to gluttony, not because some invisible magical man said so, but because it is wasteful utilization of resources that could benefit those who actually need it. Our reasons for opposing gluttony are reality-based.

That can be said for stealing, murder (or violence in general), and other social mis-behaviors.
The argument presupposes that belief is subject to the will. I can't simply stop believing that my car exists. One is either convinced of a claim, or not.

It is also an attempt to resolve the cognitive dissonance some theists experience when dealing with atheists. These individuals feel that the existence of a god is so obvious that there's no way one couldn't believe in one, so the resolution is that atheists really do , deep down inside, believe in a god, however, they are just in a phase where they are engaged in a youthful rebellion .
It is condescending and false. All we can do is assure everyone that we really do, in fact, not believe. After that, the conversation is merely empty accusations, or with people who are apparently telepathic.

It would be like Hindus accusing Christians of just rebelling against Vishnu because they want to violate Vishnu's rules. At the same time, the Christians accuse Hindus of rebelling against Yahweh because they want to voilate Yahweh's rules.
Both cannot be right, however, both can be wrong. Ultimately, the only way to make progress in this conversation is through logic, reason and evidence for any claims made.

Responses Atheists Should Give When Such Arguments are Brought Up

When I left Christianity, some of my former Christian friends tried to comb through my life, looking for something to say,

“AHA — Hopefullandlord wants to do sin x. That’s why he became an atheist.”

I’ve noticed, since, that many Christians use this argument, as ridiculous as it seems to be, to dismiss the legitimate arguments atheists make against religion.
Here are are responses that may stop this argument in its tracks and, perhaps, get conversations back on track:

1. The “Right Back At You” Option: You’re Just A Christian Because You Want To Feel Morally Superior
That’s pretty much it. I mean, you say that we’re all sinners — but based on a rather ridiculous fairy tale, you claim you’re going to heaven for eternity and I’m not, as long as I’m an atheist. That’s incredibly arrogant. You’re using your arbitrary beliefs to try to feel like you’re better than me. And the more you’re out and about talking about the importance of the Bible’s virtues, the more you are using your rose-colored glasses to put you on an imaginary pedestal constructed by your own personal imaginary friend. I mean, let’s be frank — a lot of the moral standards the Bible ascribes to are nonsense. For example, a lot of the Bible’s supposed restrictions on sex are bigoted views of beautiful acts that don’t hurt anybody. The “rules” just made up so that you can feel better than other people; they don’t help the world become a better place. And, furthermore, when you’re trying hard not to “sin,” I tend to see right through it to your attempt to feel morally superior to me. Same when you praise the virtues of faith and go on about how I’m in rebellion against your imaginary friend, or other items. You are trying to set up ridiculous standards and following them so you can feel morally superior to non-Christians based on a moral system that, in many places, serves no purpose except your own sense of moral superiority. The problem is yours, and not at all mine.

The next option below is the best reply

2. The Critique Of The Christian Moral System: If All I Wanted To Do Was Sin, I’d Sin And Ask Forgiveness
If all I wanted to do was sin, I’d just claim the title of “Christian” and do it. I mean, atheists are among the most hated groups where I live. So if I wanted to sin, I wouldn’t be an atheist. I’d be one of those liberal Christians so I could still get all the, like, respect a Christian gets, and then I’d “sin” and praise God for forgiving me. Because here’s the deal — in your system, even if I was a serial killer, if I genuinely asked for forgiveness at any point, God would forgive me. We atheists don’t have that. When we do something that hurts somebody else, we can’t go to a nonexistent God and ask for forgiveness and feel better about it. No. There’s no God; the primary offense wasn’t to God — it was to that person, and we have to make amends with that person, and there are absolutely no take-backsies granted by imaginary friends. So in that way, being an atheist is harder than being a Christian who can just go up to God and ask for forgiveness.

3 The “Objection! Irrelevant” Option: Maybe That Is A Reason. So What?
Why the heck does it matter that I want to sin? It seems to be a red herring as to whether or not God exists. The fact that I want to break the rules of some arbitrary code does not mean that the arbitrary code was made by the Almighty God. We don’t use that logic in a lot of other situations. For example, there used to be segregation in the USA, but a lot of black people believed that black and white people were equal. A white person might say to a black person, “You just want to think that we’re equal so you can drink from the ‘white’ water fountain.” Well, yes, that is a reason, Sherlock. I do want to drink from the same water fountain, sit at the same lunch counter, sit at the same spot in the bus, and vote. But those desires are evidence — not all the evidence, but part of the evidence — that I am equal to you in those respects; I want to do those things BECAUSE I think I am equal to you, not because I think I’m not equal to you. So the question is not whether or not I want to drink from the same water fountain, so much as it is about a broader question of equality. Same with this. Maybe I want to “sin” because I don’t believe in God. So the real question is not whether or not I want to “sin.” The question that matters is whether the reason I want to “sin” — a lack of belief in God’s existence — is valid or not.



4. “This Hurts You More Than It Hurts Me”: Maybe This Argument Highlights Your Own Doubts
By saying that atheists are atheists because they want to sin, and using that argument to dismiss them, the Christian community you’re part of has effectively insulating the standards of “sin” from criticism. Which is exactly what one would want to do if the standards were bullshit and would fall apart if the rank and file questioned them. The upsetting thing is that this argument takes for granted that you, as a Christian, can understand the desire to break the Bible’s arbitrary rules, but then it fights that desire with guilt that insulates the rules from criticism. It also uses the resulting resentment from that blocked desire to distance you from those who, like atheists, have subjected these rules to the criticism they so badly need. If that’s the case, something you may have to be honest about is that you have that resentment, which may be a major step. And then, perhaps, consider another possibility — maybe that anger at the person doing something that the Bible says you can’t do is not best directed at the person, but at the Bible — especially if that “something” seems to be an arbitrary rule that makes your life harder to live. Maybe it’s also an indication that you yourself have doubts, because think about it — if you thought God was with you and that atheists who sinned went to hell for eternity, wouldn’t you have less understanding of the desire to sin? Maybe the laws of “sin” are, in fact, arbitrary and shouldn’t be followed, and you were lied to, and your anger should be directed at the lies rather than to the people who uncovered them. If so, that’s something that’s important to look into, right?

.

Bumping because this is a great thread and needs more attention

sexymonkey:
am still a deist, I'll get there soon.

Where do you wish to get?. I can infer that you think being atheist is a goal to reach , it's a frame most reach unwillingly after much dissonance, and here you are making it seem like goal.

Ruq:


Where do you wish to get?. I can infer that you think being atheist is a goal to reach , it's a frame most reach unwillingly after much dissonance, and here you are making it seem like goal.

True

Exposé

stephendamsoho:
Exposé

Thanks

hopefulLandlord:

I don't think there is any other nairalander that likes booking space on his own thread like you

hahn:


I don't think there is any other nairalander that likes booking space on his own thread like you

Why do you think he has Landlord as part of his moniker?

kevoh:

Why do you think he has Landlord as part of his moniker?

True.

That would explain the "hopeful"

Not true, majority become atheist because they have some life buggling questions which most religion can't answer or the answers given are irrational and stewpid

Imagine some religion that said there is a god who will torture and burn his own creations forever in a fire . this sounds crazy . no justice either , how does few years of sin make a person worthy of eternal torture ? Its cruel and barbaric

The logical point is since nobody beg God to create them , as the creator he owns the life , can't he just un-create them to their former state before creation rather than subject them to that barbaric act ?

This and many more is the reason why many conclude that its either there is no god or if there is a god he is definitely not as most religion paint him.

Note: am not an atheist, and I don't hate atheists

hahn:


True.

That would explain the "hopeful"

Peacefullove:
Not true, majority become atheist because they have some life buggling questions which most religion can't answer or the answers given are irrational and stewpid

Imagine some religion that said there is a god who will torture and burn his own creations forever in a fire . this sounds crazy . no justice either , how does few years of sin make a person worthy of eternal torture ? Its cruel and barbaric

The logical point is since nobody beg God to create them , as the creator he owns the life , can't he just un-create them to their former state before creation rather than subject them to that barbaric act ?

This and many more is the reason why many conclude that its either there is no god or if there is a god he is definitely not as most religion paint him.

Note: am not an atheist, and I don't hate atheists

The OP just explained from his own point of view and as usual the all knowing religious apologist assumes he knows the reason why most atheist like myself became one.

Mtcheew

Peacefullove:
Not true, majority become atheist because they have some life buggling questions which most religion can't answer or the answers given are irrational and stewpid

Imagine some religion that said there is a god who will torture and burn his own creations forever in a fire . this sounds crazy . no justice either , how does few years of sin make a person worthy of eternal torture ? Its cruel and barbaric

The logical point is since nobody beg God to create them , as the creator he owns the life , can't he just un-create them to their former state before creation rather than subject them to that barbaric act ?

This and many more is the reason why many conclude that its either there is no god or if there is a god he is definitely not as most religion paint him.

Note: am not an atheist, and I don't hate atheists

You gerrit man! And I'm already revealing the true GOD. https://www.nairaland.com/2938907/doctrine-ufos

Ruq:


Where do you wish to get?. I can infer that you think being atheist is a goal to reach , it's a frame most reach unwillingly after much dissonance, and here you are making it seem like goal.

so true.

hahn:

True.
That would explain the "hopeful"

Hilarious

hopefulLandlord:


Hilarious

Absolutely brilliant writeup. Welldone op

theoneJabulani:
Absolutely brilliant writeup. Welldone op

Thanks sir

"

Ranchhoddas
read up

hmmm

Makes major sense,

More people need to see this.

This should shut up ignorant christians
Couldn't have put it better myself

You have to understand, these people view their own version of God as the ultimate source of morality.
To them, anything their holy book says is true, every rule must be followed. There is no other rulebook good enough that theirs.

So it shocks them when someone comes and tells them they don't believe in their rulebook. It offends them when they are told that their holy book are forgeries, plagarized texts and fanciful ramblings.
They are shocked when one claims they do not adherre to their rulebook or its purported author.


Hence, their reaction
"You don't believe it because you want to sin" is actually their mind saying "I can't believe you are not doing evil because my book says anyone that does not believe in the book is an evil psychopath".

It is a common ploy used by most apologists, the claim without bibles, we'll all be evil.


Dumb as mess but then.......

jonbellion:
This should shut up ignorant christians Couldn't have put it better myself

thanks bro