Atheism, as a worldview, presents itself as a rational and empirical rejection of the metaphysical and the divine. In its modern form, it emerges from a legacy of Enlightenment thought, scientific materialism, and existentialist philosophy. Yet, beneath its confident claims of intellectual rigor lies an undercurrent of profound existential unease. The “sinking feeling” associated with atheism, a phrase used to describe the emotional and intellectual void left in the absence of transcendent meaning, is not merely a superficial sentiment but a deep philosophical and theological challenge.
Atheism and the Question of Meaning
Atheism, in its most developed form, posits that the universe is devoid of intrinsic meaning or purpose. This worldview, rooted in naturalism, assumes that everything that exists is the result of random, purposeless processes. The human quest for meaning is reduced to a subjective, cultural, or psychological construct, lacking any grounding in a larger metaphysical order. As Jean-Paul Sartre famously stated, “Existence precedes essence,” meaning that individuals are not born with a predefined purpose but must create meaning for themselves in a meaningless universe.
However, this existentialist formulation of atheism has led to what can be described as a “sinking feeling”—a sense of despair, futility, and insignificance. While atheists often argue that meaning can be constructed through personal and collective endeavors, the metaphysical reality that undergirds these claims remains void. Friedrich Nietzsche’s declaration that “God is dead” did not simply signal the end of religious belief but the collapse of the entire metaphysical framework that had sustained Western thought for millennia. Without God, Nietzsche warned, humanity is left staring into the abyss, confronted with the terrifying prospect of nihilism.
Philosophical Consequences of Atheism
The sinking feeling of atheism is not simply an emotional response to the loss of God but a logical outcome of its philosophical tenets. If the universe is the product of blind physical forces, then human life, consciousness, and morality are accidental byproducts of an indifferent cosmos. Atheism’s reliance on materialism— the belief that only physical matter and its interactions constitute reality—strips away the possibility of any transcendent purpose or moral order.
Prominent atheist philosophers such as Thomas Nagel have admitted to the unsettling implications of this worldview. Nagel, while committed to atheism, acknowledges that the absence of a teleological order leaves a profound void. He writes, “It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.” 1 Nagel’s candid admission points to the deeper, often unspoken, emotional and intellectual disquiet that accompanies atheism.
The philosophical implications of atheism extend beyond metaphysics to ethics. Without a divine moral lawgiver, morality is reduced to either evolutionary psychology or cultural relativism. This reductionist view of morality, while offering explanatory power, fails to provide a robust foundation for moral obligations. Atheist philosopher J.L. Mackie, in his work Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, argues that moral values are not objective but are the product of human invention.2 Yet, Mackie’s conclusion inevitably leads to moral subjectivism, leaving individuals and societies without a compelling reason to adhere to any particular ethical standard beyond pragmatic concerns.
The Theological Critique
From a theological perspective, atheism’s rejection of transcendence is viewed as a tragic misapprehension of the nature of human existence and the divine. Christianity, in particular, offers a counter-narrative that addresses the existential despair so often associated with atheism. The sinking feeling that arises from atheism’s denial of God is, according to Christian theology, the natural result of humanity’s estrangement from its Creator. As Augustine of Hippo famously stated, “You have made us for Yourself, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in You.” 3 This restlessness—this sinking feeling—emerges when humanity rejects its inherent connection to the divine.
In contrast to atheism, Christianity posits a universe imbued with meaning and purpose, grounded in the character of a personal, omnipotent, and benevolent God. Human beings, according to Christian doctrine, are not accidental byproducts of blind forces but are created imago Dei (in the image of God) and endowed with intrinsic worth and purpose. The theological response to atheism, therefore, is not merely an appeal to abstract metaphysical principles but an invitation to a relational encounter with the divine, where the deepest longings for meaning, purpose, and love are fulfilled.
Christian theologians, such as Alvin Plantinga, have argued that atheism’s naturalistic framework is not only inadequate for explaining the richness of human experience but also self-defeating. In his evolutionary argument against naturalism, Plantinga contends that if our cognitive faculties are the product of unguided evolutionary processes, we have no reason to trust them as reliable sources of truth.4 Thus, atheism undercuts its own claims to rationality, leading to an epistemological crisis.
The Existential Appeal of Christianity
The sinking feeling of atheism is not simply an intellectual problem but a deeply existential one. Human beings, by their very nature, seek meaning, purpose, and belonging. Atheism, while offering intellectual critiques of theism, fails to provide a satisfying answer to these fundamental human needs. In contrast, Christianity offers not only a coherent intellectual framework but also a profound existential hope.
At the heart of Christian theology is the claim that God entered human history in the person of Jesus Christ, providing a solution to the existential despair that haunts humanity. The Christian narrative of creation, fall, redemption, and restoration offers a comprehensive account of human existence that addresses the deepest questions of meaning, morality, and destiny. The resurrection of Jesus Christ, in particular, stands as the ultimate refutation of nihilism, offering a promise of eternal life and a future hope that transcends the limitations of the material world.
The sinking feeling of atheism, while often portrayed as an emotional response to the absence of God, is in fact a profound philosophical and theological challenge. Atheism’s rejection of transcendence leaves humanity adrift in a cosmos devoid of meaning, purpose, and moral grounding. While atheists may attempt to construct meaning through personal and collective endeavors, the metaphysical void at the heart of atheism remains. Christianity, in contrast, offers a robust response to this existential despair, grounding human life in a meaningful, purposeful universe created by a loving God. The sinking feeling of atheism, then, is not merely an emotional experience but a signpost pointing to the deeper realities of human existence—realities that can only be fully understood and embraced within a theistic framework.
Implications of Atheism
The concept of implication, understood as an idea that logically follows from an established set of premises, finds a clear analog in both mathematics and philosophy. In the realm of mathematics, for instance, the Pythagorean theorem, , offers a lucid demonstration: even without explicitly stating the length of the hypotenuse, one can infer its value through deductive reasoning. Likewise, syllogistic reasoning in philosophy produces implications based on given premises. A classic syllogism might declare: all men are mortal; Socrates is a man. The logical implication, though unstated, is that Socrates is mortal.
In much the same way, the implications of atheism—that is, the denial of a deity—are inescapable, even if not always fully recognized. This essay focuses on one of the most significant implications: that if atheism is true, human life lacks any objective meaning. This argument does not require proving, as prominent atheists themselves have long acknowledged this uncomfortable conclusion. Instead, this discussion will explore the ramifications of atheism’s implicit claim of meaninglessness and the cognitive dissonance it induces. When confronted with the claim that human life has no objective meaning, individuals often experience a profound existential discomfort—a state of despair that arises when they attempt to live in contradiction to the inescapable implication of their belief system.
Atheism and Meaninglessness: The Acknowledgment from Atheist Thinkers
Many leading atheists have not only accepted but also openly articulated the idea that atheism implies meaninglessness. In his work The Atheist’s Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions, Alex Rosenberg presents a bleak assessment of life, offering a list of “obvious” answers to fundamental existential questions. Among these, he asserts that there is no God, no purpose to the universe, and no objective meaning to life. For Rosenberg, concepts such as free will, morality, and the soul are equally dismissed as illusions. His work encapsulates a worldview that sees human life as the result of mere chance, devoid of intrinsic purpose or moral significance. The denial of these fundamental human aspirations is not a conclusion drawn reluctantly but rather a central premise of his atheistic framework.
Other thinkers in the scientific and philosophical community have echoed Rosenberg’s view. Graham Lawton, writing for New Scientist, succinctly concludes that life is meaningless, describing human existence as “a random blip of matter and energy in an uncaring and impersonal universe.” Stephen J. Gould, a leading evolutionary paleontologist, also embraced atheism’s implications, asserting that while humans may long for a higher purpose, none exists. Gould’s reflections highlight a perspective in which humanity’s existence is reduced to an evolutionary accident, without cosmic significance or purpose.
Philosophers such as Thomas Nagel and Richard Dawkins further reinforce this view. In What Does It All Mean?, Nagel suggests that life, when considered from an objective standpoint, seems entirely without purpose. Similarly, Dawkins describes the universe as one marked by “blind, pitiless indifference,” where concepts of good and evil hold no substantive weight. These atheists do not merely hint at the meaninglessness of life but fully embrace it, viewing existence through a lens of scientific materialism that offers no room for metaphysical or moral purpose.
Cognitive Dissonance and Despair: The Human Struggle Against Meaninglessness
Although prominent atheists have consistently affirmed the logical implication of atheism—that life is ultimately meaningless—they often fall short in addressing the profound psychological and emotional dissonance that such a belief creates. Human beings seem hardwired to search for meaning, a drive that becomes difficult to reconcile with the view that life is nothing more than a fleeting moment in an indifferent universe. This cognitive dissonance, the tension between one’s instinctual sense of purpose and the atheistic belief in meaninglessness, leads to a state of despair for many.
Albert Camus, one of the most influential existential philosophers, wrestled deeply with this question. In his seminal work The Myth of Sisyphus, Camus explores the absurdity of life—that is, the confrontation between humanity’s desire for meaning and the universe’s refusal to provide it. For Camus, the fundamental philosophical question is whether life is worth living once one accepts its inherent meaninglessness. His conclusion, though bleak, is that individuals must find ways to rebel against this absurdity, to live with the knowledge that life has no ultimate purpose.
This internal struggle is further complicated by the fact that many atheists, while accepting the meaninglessness of life in principle, attempt to imbue their lives with subjective, self-created meaning. Jerry Coyne, a biologist and prominent atheist, argues that while science reveals the universe to be purposeless, humans can still create personal meaning through activities such as relationships, creativity, and personal fulfillment. Alom Shaha echoes this sentiment, advising his readers to “create a sense of meaning and purpose by doing something useful,” even while acknowledging the ultimate futility of such efforts.
The Failure of Subjective Meaning
The suggestion that individuals can create their own meaning, however, falls short upon closer examination. This approach reduces the concept of meaning to little more than a semantic trick, where any activity—no matter how trivial—can be imbued with personal significance. Whether one finds meaning in cooking a meal or walking a dog, this subjective interpretation fails to address the deeper existential problem posed by atheism: without an external source of meaning, such as a deity, any attempt to create meaning is ultimately arbitrary and lacks objective validity.
Moreover, the notion of self-created meaning opens the door to morally reprehensible behavior. If meaning is entirely subjective, there is no rational basis to claim that one person’s actions—whether they be charitable or malevolent—are any more meaningful than another’s. As Camus himself recognized, the lack of an objective foundation for morality renders all actions permissible. The existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre famously concluded that “everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist.” In such a world, the difference between nurturing a child and committing an atrocity is one of personal preference, not moral truth.
Theological and Cosmological Perspectives: Insights from the James Webb Space Telescope
The debate over atheism’s implications for meaning intersects profoundly with theology, particularly in the areas of teleology and theodicy. The theological argument for a purposeful universe posits that the existence of a creator imbues life with inherent meaning, as creation itself reflects the divine will. This view is sharply contrasted with the atheistic position, which sees the universe as a product of random, naturalistic processes. Recent discoveries made possible by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) offer new insights into this ongoing debate.
The JWST has revealed unprecedented details about the early universe, providing evidence of complex galactic structures that challenge previous notions of cosmological development. While atheists might interpret these findings as further proof of a universe governed by natural laws alone, theologians and theistic philosophers see in them signs of an ordered, purposeful cosmos. The fine-tuning of the universe, evident in the precise conditions required for life to emerge, offers compelling evidence for teleological design—a key counterargument to atheistic claims of meaninglessness. These discoveries invite a re-examination of the theological implications of cosmology, suggesting that the universe’s complexity and order may point to a transcendent source of purpose.
The Inescapable Despair of Atheism
Atheism, when followed to its logical conclusion, leaves its adherents in a state of existential despair. The denial of a deity implies that life has no objective meaning, a reality that many atheists openly acknowledge. While some attempt to create their own subjective meaning, this effort ultimately fails to satisfy the deep human need for purpose and coherence. Without an external, objective source of meaning, such as God, individuals are left adrift in a universe of blind indifference. As Camus, Sartre, and other existential thinkers have observed, this leads inevitably to a state of absurdity, where the only truly meaningful philosophical question is whether life is worth living at all.
In light of these considerations, the theological and cosmological implications of recent discoveries, particularly those made by the James Webb Space Telescope, offer a compelling counter-narrative. These findings suggest that the universe may indeed have a purpose, one that aligns with the theological concept of a divinely ordered cosmos. The sinking feeling of atheism, then, may not be the final word on the meaning of life, but rather a challenge to explore deeper philosophical and theological truths that offer hope in the face of meaninglessness.
Nothing Left But Despair: A Theological and Existential Response
In a world where existential despair threatens to envelop the human soul, the question of meaning becomes paramount. What remains when all notions of significance are systematically eroded? Lawrence Krauss, in his characteristic forthrightness, captures the despair that so often accompanies atheism when he declares, “You’re insignificant… The future is miserable.” 13 The renowned physicist echoes a sentiment that aligns with other atheistic thinkers: human life, stripped of transcendental meaning, is reduced to nothing more than a fleeting existence in an indifferent cosmos. Voltaire, in his Poem on the Lisbon Disaster, articulated this bleak outlook centuries earlier, lamenting that “Man is a stranger to his own research; he knows not whence he comes, nor whither he goes. Tormented atoms in a bed of mud, devoured by death, a mockery of fate.”14 Such reflections seem to affirm a nihilistic worldview, where humanity is nothing more than “tormented atoms” subject to a meaningless universe. This grim appraisal has found modern resonance in the writings of Peter Atkins, who writes, “At root, there is only corruption, and the unstemmable tide of chaos. Gone is purpose; all that is left is direction.”15 Albert Camus too, in wrestling with the absurdity of existence, suggested that despair is the only honest response to the lack of eternal consciousness, invoking Kierkegaard’s words, “If man had no eternal consciousness… what would life be but despair?”16 Thus, the philosophical and existential confrontation with atheism often leads to a stark conclusion: despair is inevitable. Bertrand Russell encapsulates this conclusion with chilling clarity: “Brief and powerless is Man’s life… Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way.”17 In this vision, human life becomes a tragic absurdity, a brief flare of consciousness doomed to extinguishment in the vast, uncaring universe.
Yet, amid this chorus of despair, Christianity offers a radical counter-narrative. Hebrews 6:19 speaks of a “hope that anchors the soul,” providing not only an alternative to despair but a robust foundation for purpose and meaning. Christianity, far from being a “noble lie,” presents a truth that is deeply rooted in the theological conviction that humanity is created imago Dei—in the image of God, with intrinsic value and purpose. This Christian theodicy does not simply provide a superficial response to existential angst; it offers a holistic framework that addresses the profound questions of human identity, purpose, and destiny.
A Response to Atheism’s Despair
The tragedy of atheism is perhaps most poignantly illustrated in the life of Madalyn Murray O’Hair, the founder of American Atheists, whose vehement rejection of God could not save her from a life marked by loneliness and existential sorrow. When her personal belongings were auctioned after her murder, among her writings was found the recurring plea: “Somebody, somewhere, love me!”18 This heart-wrenching cry encapsulates the paradox of atheism: it denies the existence of a loving Creator while yearning for the love and meaning that such a Creator alone can provide.
Dan Barker, another prominent atheist, admits the ultimate futility of life in atheistic terms: “In the end of the cosmos it’s not going to matter… There is no value to our species… we are no different than a piece of broccoli in the cosmic sense.”19 Such statements highlight the philosophical dead-end that atheism represents: if there is no God, then love, honor, and meaning are merely illusions produced by biological processes. There is no transcendent value, only the fleeting sensations of a material brain, destined for decay.
Christianity, however, confronts this despair with a profound message of hope. Far from being mere cosmic accidents, human beings are purposefully created by a loving God. The incarnation of Jesus Christ—God taking on human flesh—is the ultimate proof of divine love. As John 3:16 declares, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” This sacrificial love transcends the boundaries of time and space, offering eternal significance to each individual life.
Moreover, the Christian narrative emphasizes the importance of human free will. God’s love is not coercive; He grants humanity the freedom to choose or reject Him. As Deuteronomy 30:19 puts it, “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life.” This invitation to choose life is not a subjective, existential choice, but an objective reality with eternal consequences. The rejection of God leads not only to existential despair but to ultimate separation from the source of all meaning and love.
Theological Significance of Creation: Insights from the James Webb Space Telescope
The exploration of the cosmos has often been employed to underscore human insignificance, especially in atheistic thought. Yet, the latest discoveries from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) offer an opportunity to reframe this narrative. The JWST’s unprecedented insights into the formation of galaxies, stars, and exoplanets expand our understanding of the universe’s complexity and grandeur. Rather than diminishing human significance, these findings invite awe at the Creator’s handiwork.
Recent JWST data reveals that galaxies formed earlier and faster than previously thought, implying that the universe’s structure and development are far more intricate than earlier models suggested.20 This complexity invites theological reflection on the Creator’s wisdom and intentionality. Psalm 19:1 resonates anew in light of these findings: “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows His handiwork.” In the face of such cosmic grandeur, the Christian response is not despair but worship, acknowledging that the vastness of the universe reflects the infinite majesty of its Creator.
A Hope that Anchors the Soul
Atheism, with its emphasis on meaninglessness and despair, offers no hope beyond the grave. Agnostic scholars like Bart Ehrman have confessed to being haunted by the fear of death, admitting that “The fear of death gripped me for years.” This fear, grounded in atheistic existentialism, is alleviated only by turning to the Christian hope, which is rooted in Christ’s victory over death. As Hebrews 2:15 states, Christ came to “release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.”
In a world awash in despair, Christianity offers the only coherent framework for understanding human value, purpose, and destiny. Rather than consigning humanity to insignificance, it affirms that each person is a beloved creation of God, destined for eternal life. Where atheism demands despair, Christianity proclaims hope. Instead of the “tormented atoms” of atheism, we are offered a divine promise: “I have loved you with an everlasting love” (Jeremiah 31:3).
Footnotes
1 Thomas Nagel, The Last Word, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 130.
2 J.L. Mackie, Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, (New York: Penguin Books, 1977).
3 Augustine of Hippo, Confessions, trans. Henry Chadwick (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 3
4 Alvin Plantinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 314-315.
5 Alex Rosenberg, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions, (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2011).
6 Alex Rosenberg, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions, (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2011).
7 Graham Lawton, “What is the Meaning of Life?” New Scientist.
8 Stephen J. Gould, Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1989).
9 Thomas Nagel, What Does It All Mean? A Very Short Introduction to Philosophy, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987).
10 Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life, (New York: Basic Books, 1995).
11 Edward O. Wilson, On Human Nature, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978).
12 William Provine, The Origins of Theoretical Population Genetics, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
13 Lawrence Krauss, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing, 1st ed.
(New York: Free Press, 2012).
14 Voltaire, Poem on the Lisbon Disaster, trans. Norman Torrey (New York: Columbia University Press, 1947).
15 Peter Atkins, On Being: A Scientist’s Exploration of the Great Questions of Existence, 1st ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).
16 Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus, trans. Justin O’Brien (New York: Vintage Books, 1991), 22.
17 Bertrand Russell, A Free Man’s Worship (London: Thornton Butterworth, 1923).
18 Madelyn Murray O’Hair, The Atheist: Madalyn Murray O’Hair, 1st ed. (Austin: American Atheists Press, 1972).
19 Dan Barker, Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America’s Leading Atheists (New York: Ulysses Press, 2008).
20 James Webb Space Telescope findings from NASA, “Early Release Observations,” accessed September 2024.
21 Bart D. Ehrman, God’s Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question—Why We Suffer (New York: HarperOne, 2008).
Commenti