A list of thought-provoking, funny and not-so-funny quotes on the subject of Atheism as seen throughout the ages by some great and not-so-great thinkers.

Atheism and Atheists Quotes and Sayings

A comprehended god is no god. ~St. John Chrysostom

If there were no God, there would be no Atheists. ~G.K. Chesterton

God is not discoverable or demonstrable by purely scientific means, unfortunately for the scientifically minded. But that really proves nothing. It simply means that the wrong instruments are being used for the job. ~John Bertram Phillips

If God were small enough to be understood, He would not be big enough to be worshiped. ~Evelyn Underhill

Nobody talks so constantly about God as those who insist that there is no God. ~Heywood Broun

I once wanted to become an atheist, but I gave up – they have no holidays. ~Henny Youngman

The worst moment for the atheist is when he is really thankful and has nobody to thank. ~Dante Gabriel Rossetti

To you I’m an atheist; to God, I’m the Loyal Opposition. ~Woody Allen

A little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion. ~Francis Bacon

The Old Testament is responsible for more atheism, agnosticism, disbelief—call it what you will—than any book ever written; it has emptied more churches than all the counter-attractions of cinema, motor bicycle and golf course. ~Alan Alexander Milne

Postulating the nonexistence of God, atheism immediately commits the blunder of an absolute negation, which is self-contradictory. For, to sustain the belief that there is no God, it has to demonstrate infinite knowledge, which is tantamount to saying, “I have infinite knowledge that there is no being in existence with infinite knowledge.” ~Ravi Zacharias

I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how he could look up into the heavens and say there is no God. ~Abraham Lincoln

By night an atheist half believes in God. ~Edward Young

I cannot but pity the man who recognizes nothing godlike in his own nature. ~William Ellery Channing

Atheism is a disease of the mind caused by eating underdone philosophy. ~Austin O’Malley

I believe in God as I believe that the Sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else. ~C.S. Lewis

We may seek God by our intellect, but we only can find him with our heart. ~Cotvos

Understanding God is not attained by calling into session all arguments for and against Him, in order to debate whether He is a reality or a figment of the mind. God cannot be sensed as a second thought, as an explanation of the origin of the universe. He is either the first and the last, or just another concept. ~Abraham Joshua Heschel

Shouldn’t atheist have an equal obligation to explain pleasure in a world of randomness. Where does pleasure come from? ~G.K. Chesterton

The turning point in our lives is when we stop seeking the God we want and start seeking the God who is. ~Patrick Morley

The real attitude of sin in the heart towards God is that of being without God; it is pride, the worship of myself, that is the great atheistic fact in human life. ~Oswald Chambers

A god who let us prove his existence would be an idol. ~Deitrich Bonhoeffer

Self is the opaque veil that hides the Face of God from us. It can be removed only in spiritual experience, never by mere instruction. ~Aiden Wilson Tozer

Secrets of the incomprehensible wisdom of God, unknown to any besides Himself! Man, sprung up only of a few days, wants to penetrate, and to set bounds to it. Who is it that hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been His counselor? ~Jeanne Guyon

According to the teaching of our Lord, what is wrong with the world is precisely that it does not believe in God. Yet it is clear that the unbelief which he so bitterly deplored was not an intellectual persuasion of God’s non-existence. Those whom he rebuked for their lack of faith were not men who denied God with the top of their minds, but men who, while apparently incapable of doubting him with the top of their minds, lived as though he did not exist. ~John Baillie

Without God man has no reference point to define himself. 20th century philosophy manifests the chaos of man seeking to understand himself as a creature with dignity while having no reference point for that dignity. ~Robert Charles Sproul

If we were to judge nature by common sense or likelihood, we wouldn’t believe the world existed. ~Annie Dillard

I hope for the day when everyone can speak again of God without embarrassment. ~Paul Johannes Tillich

Still, even the most admirable of atheists is nothing more than a moral parasite, living his life based on borrowed ethics. This is why, when pressed, the atheist will often attempt to hide his lack of conviction in his own beliefs behind some poorly formulated utilitarianism, or argue that he acts out of altruistic self-interest. But this is only post-facto rationalization, not reason or rational behavior. ~Vox Day

My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying that it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too–for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist–in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless–I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality–namely my idea of justice–was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning. ~C.S. Lewis

Humanism or atheism is a wonderful philosophy of life as long as you are big, strong, and between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five. But watch out if you are in a lifeboat and there are others who are younger, bigger, or smarter. ~William Murray

If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible, since, having neither parts nor limits, He has no affinity to us. We are then incapable of knowing either what He is or if He is. This being so, who will dare to undertake the decision of the question? Not we, who have no affinity to Him.

Who then will blame Christians for not being able to give a reason for their belief, since they profess a religion for which they cannot give a reason? They declare, in expounding it to the world, that it is a foolishness, and then you complain that they do not prove it! If they proved it, they would not keep their word; it is in lacking proofs that they are not lacking in sense. “Yes, but although this excuses those who offer it as such and takes away from them the blame of putting it forward without reason, it does not excuse those who receive it.” Let us then examine this point, and say, “God is, or He is not.” But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up. What will you wager? According to reason, you can do neither the one thing nor the other; according to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.

Do not, then, reprove for error those who have made a choice; for you know nothing about it. “No, but I blame them for having made, not this choice, but a choice; for again both he who chooses heads and he who chooses tails are equally at fault, they are both in the wrong. The true course is not to wager at all.”

Yes; but you must wager. It is not optional. You are embarked. Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose. This is one point settled. But your happiness? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. ~Blaise Pascal

Can one be a saint if God does not exist? That is the only concrete problem I know of today. ~Albert Camus

You think you are too intelligent to believe in God. I am not like you. ~Napoleon Bonaparte

Atheism is a crutch for those who cannot bear the reality of God. ~Tom Stoppard

Atheists express their rage against God although in their view He does not exist. ~C.S. Lewis

It amazes me to find an intelligent person who fights against something which he does not at all believe exists. ~Mohandas Gandhi

Analyzing “If there were no God, there would be no Atheists.” ~G.K. Chesterton

Simple Explanation

Quick Insights

• G.K. Chesterton’s quote suggests that the concept of atheism relies on the idea of God.
• Atheism is a response to theism, so without theism, atheism wouldn’t exist.
• The quote highlights the interdependence of belief and disbelief.
• It implies that atheism is a reaction to the idea of God, not an independent concept.
• The quote can be seen as a commentary on the nature of belief and disbelief.
• It encourages readers to think about the relationship between theism and atheism.

Thorough Examination

G.K. Chesterton’s quote, “If there were no God, there would be no Atheists,” is a thought-provoking statement that delves into the relationship between belief and disbelief. At its core, the quote suggests that the very concept of atheism is dependent on the idea of God. To understand this, let’s break it down into simpler terms.

Atheism, by definition, is the disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. This means that for someone to identify as an atheist, they must first acknowledge the concept of God, even if it’s to reject it. In other words, atheism is a response to theism, the belief in a god or gods. Without the idea of God, there would be no need for a term to describe the lack of belief in such an entity.

Imagine a world where the concept of God never existed. In such a world, people might hold various beliefs about the nature of the universe, but the specific label of “atheist” would be meaningless. This is because atheism is not an independent belief system but rather a reaction to theism. It’s like trying to describe the color blue to someone who has never seen any color—the concept simply wouldn’t make sense without a frame of reference.

Chesterton’s quote also touches on the interdependence of belief and disbelief. Just as light cannot exist without darkness, belief and disbelief are two sides of the same coin. They define each other and give each other meaning. This interdependence is a fundamental aspect of human thought and language. We often define things by what they are not, and atheism is a prime example of this.

The quote can also be seen as a commentary on the nature of belief. It suggests that even those who reject the idea of God are, in a way, engaged with it. Atheism is not a passive lack of belief but an active stance against theism. This engagement with the idea of God, even in rejection, shows the profound impact that religious beliefs have on human thought and culture.

Moreover, the quote encourages readers to think critically about their own beliefs and the beliefs of others. It reminds us that our beliefs, whether they are religious or secular, do not exist in a vacuum. They are shaped by and react to the beliefs of those around us. This interplay of ideas is a crucial part of what makes us human.

In a practical sense, the quote can serve as a starting point for conversations about belief and disbelief. It can help people of different beliefs understand each other better by highlighting the ways in which their beliefs are interconnected. For example, an atheist and a theist might disagree on the existence of God, but they can both appreciate the fact that their beliefs are, in part, defined by each other.

The quote also has implications for how we think about tolerance and understanding. It suggests that rather than seeing different beliefs as opposed to each other, we should recognize that they are often interdependent. This can foster a more nuanced and respectful approach to discussions about belief.

Furthermore, the quote can be a useful tool for educators and philosophers. It can help illustrate complex ideas about belief, language, and human thought in a simple and memorable way. By exploring the quote’s implications, students can gain a deeper understanding of these topics.

In a broader sense, the quote speaks to the human desire to make sense of the world. Whether we believe in God or not, we are all seeking to understand our place in the universe. Atheism and theism are two ways of approaching this question, and they are more interconnected than they might first appear.

The quote also touches on the power of language to shape our thoughts. The very existence of the term “atheist” shows how our language reflects and influences our beliefs. It reminds us that the words we use are not neutral but carry with them a wealth of assumptions and implications.

Finally, the quote serves as a reminder of the complexity of human belief. It shows that our beliefs are not simple or straightforward but are shaped by a multitude of factors, including our reactions to the beliefs of others. This complexity is something to be celebrated and explored, not ignored.

In conclusion, G.K. Chesterton’s quote, “If there were no God, there would be no Atheists,” is a rich and multifaceted statement that offers insights into the nature of belief, disbelief, and human thought. Whether you agree with it or not, it provides a valuable starting point for reflection and discussion.

Logical Analysis

Quick Insights

• The quote can be analyzed logically by examining its premises and conclusions.
• The premise is that atheism is a reaction to theism.
• The conclusion is that without theism, atheism would not exist.
• This logical structure can be tested for validity and soundness.
• The quote relies on the definition of atheism as a lack of belief in God.
• It implies a causal relationship between theism and atheism.

Thorough Examination

To analyze G.K. Chesterton’s quote logically, we need to break it down into its component parts and examine the reasoning behind it. The quote presents a conditional statement: if there were no God, there would be no atheists. This can be broken down into a premise and a conclusion.

The premise of the quote is that atheism is a reaction to theism. In other words, the concept of atheism depends on the prior existence of the concept of God. This is a logical assertion because atheism, by definition, is the lack of belief in God. Without the idea of God, there would be nothing for an atheist to disbelieve in.

The conclusion of the quote is that without theism, atheism would not exist. This follows logically from the premise. If atheism is defined by its rejection of theism, then in a world without theism, the term “atheism” would be meaningless. There would be no belief in God to reject, and thus no need for a label to describe such a rejection.

To test the validity of this argument, we can use the principles of logical reasoning. A valid argument is one where the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. In this case, the argument is valid because the conclusion (no atheism without theism) follows logically from the premise (atheism is a reaction to theism).

However, validity is not the same as soundness. A sound argument is one that is not only valid but also has true premises. To determine the soundness of Chesterton’s quote, we need to examine whether the premise is true. Is atheism indeed a reaction to theism? This is a more complex question that depends on how one defines atheism.

Some people define atheism as a simple lack of belief in God, rather than an active rejection. Under this definition, it’s possible to imagine a world where people simply do not believe in God without ever having considered the idea. In such a world, the label “atheist” might not be used, but the lack of belief in God would still exist.

On the other hand, many atheists do actively reject the idea of God, which supports Chesterton’s premise. In this sense, atheism is indeed a response to theism. The existence of organized atheist movements and communities further supports this view, as these groups often define themselves in opposition to religious beliefs.

The quote also implies a causal relationship between theism and atheism. It suggests that theism is a necessary condition for atheism. This is a strong claim that can be examined from various angles. For instance, one could argue that atheism could exist independently of theism if it were defined simply as a naturalistic worldview, rather than a rejection of God.

Moreover, the quote relies on the definition of atheism as a lack of belief in God. This definition is widely accepted, but it is not the only possible definition. Some people define atheism more broadly as a lack of belief in any supernatural entities, or even as a positive assertion that no gods exist. Under these definitions, the relationship between theism and atheism might be less clear-cut.

The logical structure of the quote can also be analyzed in terms of its implications. If the quote is true, it suggests that theism and atheism are more interconnected than they might first appear. This has implications for how we think about belief and disbelief, and how we engage in conversations about these topics.

For example, if atheism is indeed a reaction to theism, then atheists and theists are not as opposed as they might seem. Instead, they are engaged in a shared conversation about the nature of belief. This could foster a more collaborative and less adversarial approach to discussions about religion and secularism.

Furthermore, the quote can be analyzed in terms of its logical form. It is a conditional statement, which means it presents a hypothetical scenario (if there were no God) and a consequent (there would be no atheists). This form of argument is common in logical reasoning and can be a powerful tool for exploring hypothetical scenarios.

In conclusion, G.K. Chesterton’s quote can be analyzed logically by examining its premises and conclusions. The quote presents a valid argument, but its soundness depends on how one defines atheism and theism. Whether or not one agrees with the quote, it provides a valuable starting point for logical analysis and discussion.

Practical Applications

Quick Insights

• The quote can be used to foster dialogue between theists and atheists.
• It encourages critical thinking about the nature of belief and disbelief.
• The quote can be a tool for teaching logical reasoning and argumentation.
• It can help individuals clarify their own beliefs and those of others.
• The quote can be applied in educational settings to teach about religion and philosophy.
• It can be used in interfaith dialogues to promote understanding and tolerance.

Thorough Examination

G.K. Chesterton’s quote, “If there were no God, there would be no Atheists,” has several practical applications that can be beneficial in various settings. One of the most immediate applications is in fostering dialogue between theists and atheists. The quote highlights the interdependence of these two positions, which can serve as a starting point for productive conversations.

In interfaith dialogues, the quote can be used to promote understanding and tolerance. Often, discussions between theists and atheists can become heated and adversarial. The quote reminds us that these positions are not as opposed as they might seem. Instead, they are engaged in a shared conversation about the nature of belief. This can help to defuse tensions and encourage more respectful and productive exchanges.

The quote also encourages critical thinking about the nature of belief and disbelief. It challenges us to examine our own beliefs and those of others more closely. By thinking critically about the relationship between theism and atheism, we can gain a deeper understanding of both positions and the people who hold them.

In educational settings, the quote can be a valuable tool for teaching about religion and philosophy. It can help students understand the complexities of belief and disbelief, and the ways in which these concepts are interconnected. By analyzing the quote, students can develop their critical thinking and analytical skills.

Moreover, the quote can be used to teach logical reasoning and argumentation. It presents a clear and concise argument that can be broken down and analyzed in terms of its premises and conclusions. This makes it a useful example for teaching the principles of logical reasoning, such as validity and soundness.

The quote can also help individuals clarify their own beliefs. By reflecting on the relationship between theism and atheism, individuals can gain a better understanding of their own positions. This can be particularly useful for those who are exploring their beliefs or questioning their faith. The quote provides a framework for thinking about these issues in a more structured and logical way.

In addition, the quote can be applied in philosophical discussions about the nature of belief. It raises important questions about how we define belief and disbelief, and how these concepts are interconnected. By exploring these questions, philosophers can gain a deeper understanding of the nature of human thought and language.

The quote also has applications in the field of psychology. It touches on the psychological aspects of belief and disbelief, and the ways in which our beliefs are shaped by our interactions with others. Psychologists can use the quote as a starting point for exploring these issues and gaining a deeper understanding of the human mind.

In a broader sense, the quote can be used to promote a more nuanced and respectful approach to discussions about belief. It reminds us that our beliefs are not simple or straightforward but are shaped by a multitude of factors. This complexity is something to be celebrated and explored, not ignored.

The quote can also be applied in the context of religious studies. It provides a useful framework for thinking about the relationship between different religious beliefs and the ways in which they influence each other. By analyzing the quote, students of religious studies can gain a deeper understanding of the complexities of religious belief.

Furthermore, the quote can be used in the context of secularism and humanism. It highlights the ways in which secular beliefs are interconnected with religious beliefs, and the importance of engaging in dialogue with those who hold different beliefs. This can help to promote a more inclusive and tolerant approach to secularism.

In the context of public discourse, the quote can be used to encourage more thoughtful and respectful conversations about belief. It reminds us that our beliefs are not isolated but are part of a broader conversation about the nature of reality. This can help to foster a more collaborative and less adversarial approach to public discussions about religion and secularism.

The quote also has applications in the field of ethics. It raises important questions about how our beliefs influence our ethical decisions, and the ways in which different beliefs can coexist in a pluralistic society. By exploring these questions, we can gain a deeper understanding of the ethical implications of our beliefs.

In conclusion, G.K. Chesterton’s quote has a wide range of practical applications. It can be used to foster dialogue, encourage critical thinking, teach logical reasoning, clarify beliefs, and promote understanding and tolerance. Whether you agree with the quote or not, it provides a valuable starting point for reflection and discussion.