Is there a God of atheism?

[Emily Lake]

While I personally find your analogy between mathematical sets and concepts of God thought-provoking, it oversimplifies the nature of atheism. Atheism fundamentally lacks belief in any gods, making the idea of a 'God of atheism' a contradiction. In mathematical terms, this is like seeking a real number where none exists within the defined parameters. Redefining 'God' outside of its conventional religious or mythological context (which would be required to establish a god of atheism) only leads to semantic territory rather than addressing the core philosophical aspects of belief and non-belief.

I do enjoy the analogy though.

You're far too nice, Gospel. And patient.

 

[Emily Lake]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

I just said that my admitting a mistake isn't so hard. I'm a truth seeker and not an egotist.

In your defense, it is much simpler for you to admit error when simple mathematics is involved than when it is a vague op post or you can retreat into the world of semantic ambiguity.

Sheesh--I can't win. So when I'm right by admitting I was wrong, then I'm still wrong. But to make your case that I'm wrong in the OP, you'll need to offer evidence that's as clear and commonly accepted as -i as well as i is the solution to x^2 = -1. In other words, you'll need to show that atheists can have no Gods regardless of the categories those Gods belong to.

Please correct me on this issue too.

FFS. This isn't hard.

There is no god of atheism, because there are no gods at all. End of. Nothing more. Gods of any sort do not exist.

 

[steve_bank]

Finally, let's try to solve the equation x^2 = -1 for x. What is x?

Not relevant to whether there is a god of atheism. Unless the answer to this one is also “no”.

That's odd. Why did you raise a presumably irrelevant issue only to complain later that it is irrelevant?

But my question is relevant to the topic of the thread. Let me explain. What is the solution to x^2 = -1? As it turns out, this question is too vague to answer because we are not told what set x belongs to, and what set x belongs to determines the answer. So if x is a real number, then there is no answer; no real number squared is -1! On the other hand, if x is a complex number, then x = i, the base of imaginary numbers, is the solution.

You mean +/- i.

Yes--I erred. The solution set to x^2 = -1 when x is a complex number is {-i, i}. Thank you for that correction.

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

This is an historic event on the forum.

Soldier actually got simple math right and made a decent analogy with it.

Congratulations, keep it up Soldier. You are learning.

 

[DBT]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value. A much better response would be to post that there is no God of atheism because scientific tests performed by independent psychologists in accredited scientific institutions demonstrate that belief in anything resembling a God is actually absent in those individuals who avow atheism. This same absence of belief in Gods has also been shown to be lacking in groups of atheists as well.

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

It's not about disbelief in God. It's just the idea of harming your parents that causes a physiological response.

 

[Shadowy Man]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value. A much better response would be to post that there is no God of atheism because scientific tests performed by independent psychologists in accredited scientific institutions demonstrate that belief in anything resembling a God is actually absent in those individuals who avow atheism. This same absence of belief in Gods has also been shown to be lacking in groups of atheists as well.

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

This seems better suited to your thread on are there any true atheists. why don’t you post this over there?

*This* thread is purportedly about whether there is a “god of atheism”. That seems to be a different question.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value. A much better response would be to post that there is no God of atheism because scientific tests performed by independent psychologists in accredited scientific institutions demonstrate that belief in anything resembling a God is actually absent in those individuals who avow atheism. This same absence of belief in Gods has also been shown to be lacking in groups of atheists as well.

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

It's not about disbelief in God. It's just the idea of harming your parents that causes a physiological response.

Yes, but when God was added to the scenario of paralyzing parents, atheists were bothered more than that scenario without God. If atheists don't believe in God, then why do they fear Him?

 

[ideologyhunter]

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

Find one atheist that was ever frightened by retaliation from the nonexistent. Will you ever get off this ridiculous tangent? Besides the Love God who could supposedly 'do harm', there are other nonentities that no atheist is afraid of -- the Boogie Man, Quetzlcoatl, Cruella DeVille, the Joker, Freddie Kreuger. Must be thousands of 'em. They are in play in conversation because a) they are cultural memes and b) they make handy targets for snarky humor. I've met literally no one in the freethought universe who expressed any second thoughts about religious wackadoodle. Most of us have either never been burdened with Bible superstition (like me) or deconverted at some point in the past and broken free in totality. Anyone who still has a foot in both camps, in some fashion, would not be an atheist yet, and therefore not part of this discussion.
What is it that makes you assume that atheists are looking over their shoulders, in fear of a divine sucker punch? Ridiculous.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value. A much better response would be to post that there is no God of atheism because scientific tests performed by independent psychologists in accredited scientific institutions demonstrate that belief in anything resembling a God is actually absent in those individuals who avow atheism. This same absence of belief in Gods has also been shown to be lacking in groups of atheists as well.

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

This seems better suited to your thread on are there any true atheists. why don’t you post this over there?

*This* thread is purportedly about whether there is a “god of atheism”. That seems to be a different question.

That's easy to answer: The evidence suggests that there is a God of atheism that atheists do believe in, their denials notwithstanding.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

Find one atheist that was ever frightened by retaliation from the nonexistent. Will you ever get off this ridiculous tangent? Besides the Love God who could supposedly 'do harm', there are other nonentities that no atheist is afraid of -- the Boogie Man, Quetzlcoatl, Cruella DeVille, the Joker, Freddie Kreuger. Must be thousands of 'em. They are in play in conversation because a) they are cultural memes and b) they make handy targets for snarky humor. I've met literally no one in the freethought universe who expressed any second thoughts about religious wackadoodle. Most of us have either never been burdened with Bible superstition (like me) or deconverted at some point in the past and broken free in totality. Anyone who still has a foot in both camps, in some fashion, would not be an atheist yet, and therefore not part of this discussion.
What is it that makes you assume that atheists are looking over their shoulders, in fear of a divine sucker punch? Ridiculous.

Uh--maybe I'm not denying scientific evidence that avowed atheists fear God. All you've posted here is assertions and denials. I thought it was only theists who deny scientific evidence. If that's the case, then many theists pose as atheists.

 

[Shadowy Man]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value. A much better response would be to post that there is no God of atheism because scientific tests performed by independent psychologists in accredited scientific institutions demonstrate that belief in anything resembling a God is actually absent in those individuals who avow atheism. This same absence of belief in Gods has also been shown to be lacking in groups of atheists as well.

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

This seems better suited to your thread on are there any true atheists. why don’t you post this over there?

*This* thread is purportedly about whether there is a “god of atheism”. That seems to be a different question.

That's easy to answer: The evidence suggests that there is a God of atheism that atheists do believe in, their denials notwithstanding.

And who is this god? What are its characteristics? Do all atheists believe and/or worship it?

 

[EricH]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value. A much better response would be to post that there is no God of atheism because scientific tests performed by independent psychologists in accredited scientific institutions demonstrate that belief in anything resembling a God is actually absent in those individuals who avow atheism. This same absence of belief in Gods has also been shown to be lacking in groups of atheists as well.

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

This seems better suited to your thread on are there any true atheists. why don’t you post this over there?

*This* thread is purportedly about whether there is a “god of atheism”. That seems to be a different question.

That's easy to answer: The evidence suggests that there is a God of atheism that atheists do believe in, their denials notwithstanding.

Just not in any way that you are able to demonstrate. Or even talk about in a meaningful way.

 

[DBT]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value. A much better response would be to post that there is no God of atheism because scientific tests performed by independent psychologists in accredited scientific institutions demonstrate that belief in anything resembling a God is actually absent in those individuals who avow atheism. This same absence of belief in Gods has also been shown to be lacking in groups of atheists as well.

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

It's not about disbelief in God. It's just the idea of harming your parents that causes a physiological response.

Yes, but when God was added to the scenario of paralyzing parents, atheists were bothered more than that scenario without God. If atheists don't believe in God, then why do they fear Him?

Why do you assume that its' a fear of God? It may be the same if Zeus or Odin was substituted for 'God,' as the additional element of reaction or response. It may be a residual element for former theists, religious conditioning can be powerful, etc.

The study is not detailed enough to pinpoint the trigger.

 

[bilby]

The idea that you can use a machine to measure fear, stress, or even truthfulness, is itself a cult belief; A pseudoscience that has no basis in reality at all.

It's also an almost uniquely American myth. Many Americans (even in law enforcement agencies) believe in lie detectors (such as polygraphs) which work (in large part) in exactly the same way that these studies of skin conductance do. But they're exactly as reliable and objective as horoscopes or tarot card readings.

European, Asian, and Australasian governments and law enforcement agencies don't use lie detectors. Because there's zero evidence of their being even slightly effective - other than as a way to scam a confession (true or false) out of a suspect who believes that lie detectors work, and/or that they will lead inevitably to his conviction.

It's bullshit all the way down. Skin conductance readings tell us only how conductive a person's skin is, and how that varies over time.

 

[Rhea]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value.

Yes, dear, that’s how definitions work. Definitions are always tautologies.
Atheism is defined as a lack of belief in god(dess)(es).

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

Does it not occur to you that the atheists react strongly to the god statements because they are being made party to all the things they find offensive about religions in the first place?


Religions are exceedingly offensive in their repeated practices of harming people for not being adherents. And here are atheists, being asked to repeat a statement that is offensive on multiple levels, and religious researchers conclude that it must be because they are afraid of a god(dess)?

So typical. No, we are afraid of YOU because you all admit out loud that you are just one faith crisis away from being a murderer, that you don’t know how to determine moral right and wrong without a religious edict and that you are willing to harm those who don’t adhere.


So the finding that 35 atheists in Finland 10 years ago find that repeating statements asking a god to harm their parents to be doubly troubling over a statement about only themselves harming their parent is entirely predictable, and NOT in a “they secretly believe in god” kind of way. Ask an atheist to pretend they are a malicious religionist - and expect a positive result!? What morons.


Study shows religionists don’t know shit about atheists…. Again. Should be the title.

 

[Rhea]

I do enjoy the analogy though.

You're far too nice, Gospel. And patient.

It’s the AI. AI patience.

 

[pood]

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God."

There is no god of atheists because atheists have no god.

There is no wife of a bachelor because bachelors don’t have wives.

There is no four-sided triangle because triangles don’t have four side.

See how that works? Yes, they are tautologies, because they are analytic truths, true in virtue of their definitions.

You, being a “mathematician,” might as well dismiss maths because maths consist of a bunch of tautologies.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

It's not about disbelief in God. It's just the idea of harming your parents that causes a physiological response.

Yes, but when God was added to the scenario of paralyzing parents, atheists were bothered more than that scenario without God. If atheists don't believe in God, then why do they fear Him?

Why do you assume that its' a fear of God?

Did you read what I posted? The atheists in the study were asked to dare God to paralyze their parents. Doing so intensified their fear response over merely wishing their parents were paralyzed with no act of God.

It may be the same if Zeus or Odin was substituted for 'God,' as the additional element of reaction or response.

Sure. The God is not specified but no doubt most of the participants thought of the Christian God.

It may be a residual element for former theists, religious conditioning can be powerful, etc.

That I agree with. I was never able to completely shake my religious indoctrination. God evidently still lurks in my psyche.

The study is not detailed enough to pinpoint the trigger.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but let me close by pointing out that the fear response evidently caused by imagining God might not be actual fear of God but fear of the possibility of God. So the avowed atheists tested in this study may be afraid that maybe God does exist after all.

 

[Shadowy Man]

It may be a residual element for former theists, religious conditioning can be powerful, etc.

That I agree with. I was never able to completely shake my religious indoctrination. God evidently still lurks in my psyche.

you are a theist who tried being an atheist but couldn’t do it. So you assume no one else can either.

Some of us never had religious indoctrination to begin with so there was little to nothing to shake off. Much easier that way it would seem.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

See that? It's not so hard to admit a mistake like I just did. It sure beats going on thinking I'm right when I'm wrong.

Let's try a harder question.
There is no God of atheists because atheism is the lack of a God image.

That's a tautology. You might have posted: "There is no God of atheists because atheists have no God." That sentence is a repetition of an assertion and so has little if any truth value.

Yes, dear, that’s how definitions work. Definitions are always tautologies.
Atheism is defined as a lack of belief in god(dess)(es).

What definition are you referring to? Tom just raised an issue (which for some strange reason he said was a question).

I did manage to find some evidence that atheists might well have at least some belief in God in the article Do Atheists Believe in God After All? From that article we have:

"According to the skin-conductance tests, the atheists found asking God to harm them or others to be just as upsetting as religious folks did. The researchers also compared the reactions of the atheists when making statements like 'I wish my parents were paralyzed' and 'I dare God to paralyze my parents.' Atheists were, like believers, more bothered by the latter statement, if you believe the skin-conductance tests, even though both declarations would be, in theory, equally empty if there were no heavenly overseer."

Note that atheists like theists were more bothered by daring God to paralyze their parents than simply wishing that their parents would be paralyzed. In other words, the addition of God into the nefarious mix made a difference for atheists as well as theists.

So why does daring God to do harm frighten atheists if they're so sure there is no God?

Does it not occur to you that the atheists react strongly to the god statements because they are being made party to all the things they find offensive about religions in the first place?

Yes, that's a possibility, but the nefarious act of paralyzing parents should be offensive on its own with no mention of God. So the fact that the fear response increases with mention of God isolates God as a source of fear on the part of some atheists. I suppose those atheists might fear the very idea of God, but we don't know for sure. Speaking for myself, I do fear God as a possibility if not as an actual being.

Religions are exceedingly offensive in their repeated practices of harming people for not being adherents.

Many atheists have harmed people too for that same reason.

And here are atheists, being asked to repeat a statement that is offensive on multiple levels, and religious researchers conclude that it must be because they are afraid of a god(dess)?

I'm not sure if the study considers that there are reasons other than theism that can cause a fear response in atheists when God is mentioned.

So typical. No, we are afraid of YOU because you all admit out loud that you are just one faith crisis away from being a murderer, that you don’t know how to determine moral right and wrong without a religious edict and that you are willing to harm those who don’t adhere.

Are you addressing this to me? I assume you are saying this to theists in general. Again, the fear response in atheists caused by considering God could have something to do with fearing people rather than God, but the issue posed in the test is a direct reference to God.

So the finding that 35 atheists in Finland 10 years ago find that repeating statements asking a god to harm their parents to be doubly troubling over a statement about only themselves harming their parent is entirely predictable, and NOT in a “they secretly believe in god” kind of way. Ask an atheist to pretend they are a malicious religionist - and expect a positive result!? What morons.

Where does the study ask an atheist to "pretend they are a malicious religionist"?

Study shows religionists don’t know shit about atheists…. Again. Should be the title.

We get very testy over tests whose conclusions we detest, now don't we?

 

[pood]

Let me try to help you further, Unknown Soldier, since you are floundering so badly.

As mentioned, “There is no god of atheists, because atheists have no god,” while indeed a tautology, is not an empty tautology, because it’s an analytic truth, true in virtue of its definition. It’s an a priori truth.

A statement like, ”Saturn has rings, because rings encircle Saturn” is not only a tautology, but an empty tautology, since it explains nothing. It is not true by definition that Saturn has rings — that had to be discovered. So it’s a synthetic, a posteriori truth. When one says, “Saturn has rings, because…” we await an explanation of how and why Saturn got its rings.

One could ask, “why do atheists have no god?” expecting a non-tautological answer, but in that case, the proper question is, “why don’t atheists believe in god?” And then atheists can explain their own positions. Some answers may differ.