r/TrueAtheism

I’m 17, and over the past few months I’ve been struggling with what I think is death anxiety.
As much as I want to believe there’s an afterlife or that some part of us continues to exist after we die, I just can’t convince myself. My brain keeps coming back to the idea that death is just an eternal sleep—like before we were born.
That thought has completely changed how I look at life.
I keep asking myself: What’s the point of anything if it all ends?
Why work hard for good grades? Why make memories with friends? Why build a career or make money? Why try to live an amazing life if one day I’ll die and won’t even remember any of it?
I’ve tried telling myself that I should just enjoy life while I have it, but then I think, “Why bother if none of it lasts?”
It’s gotten to the point where it’s hard to enjoy things. I’ll be out with friends or spending time with my parents, and instead of having fun, I start thinking about the fact that one day they’ll die, and so will I. It makes it difficult to stay in the moment because I’m constantly thinking about losing everything.
I don’t want to die. I want to live a long, happy, successful life. I just don’t know how to find meaning when I can’t stop thinking that everything eventually disappears.
Has anyone else gone through this? Did these thoughts ever get better? How did you learn to cope with them or find meaning in life despite knowing it ends?

Hell, purgatory, no heaven, bad reincarnation, no enlightenment, whatever each religion might consider the “bad place.” Obviously whatever split them into sects was important enough to divide them in the first place—cause fighting, wars, separations, crusades, even deaths—and religious people are such pedants that I can imagine them believing people from different sects within their own religions aren’t leveling up in the next life without joining the “good side.”

I just don’t get how they all look at each other in the first place and don’t realize how divided they all are. If religion is all about unity, there wouldn’t be any divisions. There wouldn’t be different religions in the way their worlds are written! But I digress…

I used to follow this mega-family who was part of a cult (you know, for science), and when some of the kids grew up and got married, they went to be missionaries in Central America. They, Baptists, went to Central America to try to save the souls…of Catholics. So, obviously this shit really matters, or if it didn’t, they’d make better use of their time, no?

And surely they must believe that all people from other religions are doomed to eternal damnation if they don’t adopt their specific religion 1 second before giving out. How do a Christian and a Muslim look at each other and not know the other one thinks they’re not going to “heaven”? It’s an automatic assumption on the reality of religion, but no one says it out loud (great PR by religion, right?). I know they look at us atheists and think we’re going to burn forever, so surely they must think that of anyone who doesn’t subscribe to their specific god(s).

During distress in life, people desperately need something to depend on.

Some lean towards addictions, some towards other people, some go for healthy methods like therapy

And for some others it's in the belief of existence of a higher entity being there to guide them.One of the illogical and inferior arguement that people make is that even non believers call for God instinctively when they're startled or scared.

Ironically that proves my point. That's exactly what the idea of God is- hope during dismal.

For example, in a plane crash, both a believer and non-believer would call out for God. But they both know that nothing's gonna save them anymore, no magical force to rescue them. But the thought occurs nevertheless

So I don't think that faith in God is problematic, but religion definitely is. It's a form of cult making people do horrible things. How do such emotionally intelligent creatures like humans so stupidly worship something non-existant and make their life principles based on it. Blind belief is the death of reason

Thoughts??

This one term frequently comes up in discussions about God. I am a naturalist and thus don't believe in anything metaphysical.

But stuff like Logic and reasoning don't have purely physical footings. I reconcile with this by saying that we can't function without having a belief in both those things.

But, does that warrant further metaphysical claims about God? Are there any naturalistic explanations for those things?

And as an extension, what do you think about belief in things without any apparent physical evidence supporting it, i.e. faith?

To an all knowing, all powerful God, prayer is completely redundant, and honestly, a bit bizarre. If God already knows every thought in my head, every outcome before it happens, and possesses a divine plan that is by definition perfect, then what is a human monologue supposed to accomplish? Begging an omniscient being to change its mind implies that either God’s original plan wasn't ideal, or that He requires constant flattery and reminders from mortals to act mercifully. It ultimately feels like a strange psychological feedback loop where people talk to the ceiling, attribute random coincidences to "answered prayers," and conveniently ignore the unanswered ones, all to convince themselves they have a dial in line to the universe's master clockmaker. 🙄

Estuve viendo recientemente las ideas de espinoza como la sustancio y el Deus dice Natura y me hizo preguntar si solo le cambiamos el nombre de dios a universo sus premisas axiomas y metafísica encaja con el ateismo o cual es su opinión de espinoza

After that debate with my V.E teacher, it was recess, I was about to eat peacefully and then this classmate of mine who's HEAVILY religious started calling me slurs for being an atheist.. He started debating with me too?? I didn't even do anything wrong but say I was an atheist, he said that "Morality came from God, God's morality is different from human's morality blah blah" and that "God is omniscient and beyond time, so before the big bang, he already existed".... The disrespect I got is crazy, I tried to tell the teachers but they didn't gaf at all??? I can't handle two person just by debating all by myself and the fact I have no CHANCE to convince them my opinion at all.. Smh.

Hey everyone,

​I’ve been reading through this subreddit for a while now, and I appreciate seeing the mostly thoughtful dialogue that happens here. I’m a passionate believer, but I often get frustrated by how poorly or uncharitably Christians and atheists talk past each other online. I really want to continue to avoid that in my own interactions.

​My goal isn't to debate, "win" an argument, or try to convert anyone. Instead, I want to better understand the internal mechanics of a consistent secular worldview on a few specific hurdles I struggle to wrap my head around. However, I often notice a major barrier in online spaces, even more analytical ones, where the default assumption is that any religious person is simply an uneducated fool spouting inherited nonsense, unworthy of serious intellectual engagement. If I can understand how an atheist grounds these concepts, I can engage in much more fruitful, respectful conversations where we actually speak the same language.

​I’d appreciate the opportunity to get your perspectives on four specific areas:

​1. How do you conceptually ground moral progress vs. change?

From my perspective, I look at history and see moral progress (like the abolition of slavery or the recognition of human rights) because I’m measuring it against a fixed, transcendent standard. I often hear the secular point that social morality existed long before major religions and that it evolves as a mechanism to optimize human survival and cooperation.

​As a believer trying to understand your framework: if morality is an evolving, adaptive social construct, how do you structurally distinguish between genuine moral progress and just arbitrary moral change over time? Without an objective anchor outside of human consensus, what is the philosophical framework that allows a secular humanist to say a past society's actions were objectively wrong, rather than just differently adapted for their specific time? I want to make sure I don't misrepresent how atheists view historical ethics.

​2. How do we, as distinct communities, address arrogant secular fundamentalism?

As a believer, I readily admit that religious fundamentalism has a massive issue with tribalism, dogmatism, and an uncharitable refusal to engage with real scholarship. It’s a flaw in religious spaces that I routinely speak against.

​However, it’s frustrating to see secular spaces frequently replicate those exact same fundamentalist habits under a different label. There is often a widespread assumption that religious believers are universally intellectually lazy, paired with a high degree of confidence when throwing out claims about religion, history, or theology that any actual scholar in religious studies would immediately recognize as inaccurate caricatures.

​If the core critique of religion is its tendency toward dogmatic arrogance and poor intellectual rigor, how do you all, as a community, check that same arrogance when it manifests in secular spaces? How do we move past the knee-jerk, "all religious people are fools who don't deserve a seat at the table" mindset, and instead foster an environment that respects scholarly nuance on both sides?

​3. Navigating the intersection of ancient texts and modern scientism

I often see skeptics express frustration that ancient theological and historical texts lack scientific accuracy or fail to account for modern empirical discoveries. From my worldview, evaluating an ancient narrative through the lens of a modern scientific journal feels like a category error, it's expecting a text to be a science textbook when its original intent was entirely different (more akin to evaluating a historical biography by whether it contains a structural engineering blueprint).

​For those in the community who hold tightly to the stance that empirical science is the only reliable source of truth, how do you ground vital concepts that the scientific method can’t actually detect, like inherent human dignity, universal rights, or justice? Do you all view these pillars of secular humanism as necessary philosophical axioms (essentially a conceptual starting assumption), or is there a logical way to derive an "ought" from an "is" using purely empirical data? I want to understand how you all bridge that gap.

​4. How do you all view a believer who wrestles deeply with hard questions but stays?:

A very common sentiment I see in atheist spaces is the idea that Christians only stay religious because they refuse to question their beliefs deeply, and that anyone who honestly, critically investigates their faith will inevitably leave it.

​I look at history and see countless brilliant Christian thinkers, scholars, and everyday believers who questioned their faith intensely, spent years wrestling with the hardest objections (like the problem of evil or divine hiddenness), and ultimately came out the other side with an even deeper, more grounded conviction. Speaking for myself, my faith doesn't rely on having a neat, 100% satisfying answer to every single complex question right this second. Finding an answer that is philosophically challenging or uncomfortable doesn't mean it's false, nor does having unresolved questions instantly pull the rug out from under the entire structure for me.

​Within your framework, how do you all view someone who genuinely investigates, asks the hard questions, acknowledges the mystery and hard spots, but ultimately concludes that the Christian framework still makes the most sense of reality? Is there room in the secular view to see that as an intellectually honest journey, or is there an assumption that anyone who stays just "didn't question hard enough"?

​I’m asking these out of genuine curiosity because I want to be a better, more respectful conversational partner to secular thinkers. I’m eager to hear how you map these macro-level ethical questions out when the scaffolding of a religious framework is removed. These are probably questions that have been asked on this sub many times, with potentially obvious answers, but to me, this is just easier

​Thank you in advance for taking the time to share your perspectives!

EDIT (first time I've done this): Wow! Thank y'all very much for these responses. Lots of good information to go through. Forgive me for the massive post, I figured it'd be better that way for what I was wanting info on, but seeing as I've had a few comments of equal length I can only hope I respond to those properly. Also, my wording is not always the best, I used "framework" a few times when there are better words that I could've used to more accurately represent atheist ot secular thought, my bad on that! Thank you all again for the replies!

Hello Friends! 

I am a doctoral student trying to help psychologist better understand the sensitive topic of grief(one personal to me). 

I think Psychology needs more Atheist representation. I would love input from this group.

If you’re 18+ and lost an immediate family member between 6–36 months ago, and it feels right for you, please consider taking this short survey: https://pacific.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cIR5ditAqHyyAIK

I am only thirteen, still learning about atheism or my beliefs. The topic to our class was about faith for God, my teacher asked if anyone was atheist and I raised my hand, then she asked me "why?", I simply answered that " I don't think Faith is really needed to solve the absolute truth of life and how 'everything'." And then she moved on to morality, she asked me again, "Does morality exist without God", i said " Yes, because morality is with or without faith." Then she asked me a question that I struggled a bit since this was the first time I debated in person.. "Yeah, but where does morality come from?".. That's where I really struggled. CAN SOMEONE HELP ME HERE??

Look I'm not wanting to pick fights, nor am I here to start and win a debate. I just simply want to understand why Atheists believe in what they claim.

As a follower of Christ I just want to make peace between Christians and Atheists. Most interactions turn out to become shouting matches and no real dialogue is exchanged.

But with that said.

Why do some Atheists believe that Christ was a real historical figure despite there being copious amounts of evidence supporting it?

(I probably know the answer to this, but Imma ask it anyway) I want to understand your side of the story. Why do Atheist and Christian interactions turnout to be screaming matches, in your opinion/experience?

Your take on Moral Fundamentalism?

From what I've heard, Atheists are depressed. Is that true for all, and if so why?

NOTE:

(This is my first time on here posting so pls bare with me, pls also understand that I am young so have a bit of curtesy pls . I'm not here to start a fight or a debate but I want to have constructive dialogue :) )

i have no faith in gods, or any higher power or beings, really. let alone religions. but also i am incredibly depressed and have no will to live. i am a a functioning member of society, i’m currently in college, have a job, have friends, lover, loves going out and hanging out with friends. but sometimes i find it reallyyy hard just to keep going? i dont see the point of living.

so my fellow atheists, how do you cope? i wish i believe in religions

I don't believe in God and everyone in my class and even every single teacher who teaches me knows about it. I didn't scored great in last exam and hit rock bottom in English I hated all the stupid questions and the one very baseless. So in my answers I wrote against it with details specified in the book

My english teacher told me that I was way to critical and I am always negative and let quote this"You don't have any faith in God, I can tell from your Moral Science paper" She teaches us moral science also and basically the whole paper was about prayer and God There was one question do you pray I wrote no so I got zero

I live in India and study in a Christian School All sisters are converted Christians and teachers are not Christians but Hindus

Have you ever intentionally or unintentionally treated someone named Christian worse? Or assumed they were stupid or came from backwards people before you knew anything about them ? Maybe something small like snubbing them etc? What about people with obvious religious names from other religions ? Just curious. I can see the negative association with "christian" leading to unconscious bias.

Apologies if a similar post has already been made. Considering how social conservatism is often associated with Christianity/religion (as it is often presented online), how did you develop your beliefs on social issues?

I'm an Atheist in a christian country, the Philippines. I did believe in "God" when I was younger, I always looked up to him, I prayed that everything was gonna get better, I did my best to try and believe, but my questions were left unanswered.

If we actually look back to the time Spain colonized the Philippines, Filipinos had their own beliefs and culture, but were ultimately washed by the Spaniards. I wouldn't say their style of spreading the word of "God" was any peaceful. Filipinos were brainwashed to follow their religion. Men's and women's rights were taken from them forcefully, they were enslaved, r@ped and abused.

How can we just forget those happened?

If you actually think about it, "God, is all loving and peaceful." How can you correlate those words to the situation? THERE ISN'T a correlation. Even if "God" exists, far too many religions exists, who can we truly believe in this world?

Crime is rising in the Philippines, people think it's the lack of belief in "God", but it's not.

EVEN if someone believes in "God", they are still capable of doing bad things. It is due to the lack of discipline, bad economy, low salaries and unfairness in this country.

People also blame our leaders, they're partially correct, but it is worth to mention that we live as one in a country.

Now, let me get back. Atheism is heavily looked down on in this country, they say we're satanists, and we belong in hell, but how is that possible when we don't believe in the Bible, that doesn't mean you'll need to lecture and discriminate people like me

I respect every religion, I think it's nice to have some hope in this world. But I just don't believe and that gives me peace. I respect you, and some other people does too, and you shouldn't stereotype every other atheists that they're evil and have no respect, because every person is different and there are different types of group/community.

Back when I was still young and in church, I assumed that everyone just pretended that God was real, and could use him to their advantage if they just twisted the words enough. I believed that since age 5.

At age 13 I was shocked that this was not the case. The elders at the Jehovah's witnesses congregation did NOT like that I believed this. It was almost like they were angrily shocked. I even went into detail about how fairly common it would possibly be to have members that don't really believe in god either but stay in the religion to keep their community and family close. On top of the fact that the JW's had such a strong disfellowship policy back then that it would just naturally be easier to lie and keep going with the facade.

I also very honestly stated that I never believed in god, but pretended just to make the adults happy. Believing in God or not isn't what brings people to the church anyways. The elders threatened me (a child at the time btw) with disfellowship if I kept speaking and believing this way.

I told them that many people hated Jesus for telling the truth. 🤷 They all ended the meeting right there. It's been many years since and I'm still rethinking that conversation.

I know that this could get me banned from this site but I'm genuinely curious. Do most Atheist hate Religious people? I have gone in multiple videos comments where they only mention god once, and lots of people I assume to be Atheist saying things like "Your gods not real" or "Why'd You have to mention God?". Sometimes I'd Find the same types of comments on religious videos and it kind of makes me annoyed. I know that the same could be said about some Christians, and they could also be annoying for me to. But I mostly see Atheist being hateful towards people who mention god and I would like to know why.

For skeptics, there is another step beyond simply rejecting religious claims.

The deeper challenge is to question attachment to thought itself—to beliefs, identities and even the sense of self. Nondual practice and Carl Jung's process of individuation both invite this kind of inquiry.

Many atheists spend their lives examining concepts, arguments and evidence, yet rarely explore the nature of awareness in which those thoughts arise. If you already stepped outside the religious circus tent, why stop there? Use that freedom to investigate your own mind. The greatest illusion may not be religion, but the unquestioned belief that 'you are your thoughts'.