The Demand for Answers: Why Unbelief Fails to Satisfy Life’s Ultimate Questions

The Demand for Answers: Why Unbelief Fails to Satisfy Life’s Ultimate Questions

The Intellectual Weight of Belief

In the pursuit of truth, one principle should remain non-negotiable: everything of value should have an answer. From why we love, to why we act, to why we seek purpose, the foundation of human consciousness is built upon the need for understanding. And yet, atheism—a belief system that often touts itself as intellectually superior—fails to answer the most fundamental question of all: Why does anything exist at all? Instead of engaging with the weight of this inquiry, many atheists evade it, redefine terms to escape accountability, and mock theists while failing to substantiate their own claims.

Atheism, in the context of this essay, is simply the lack of belief in God. The essay assumes that if you are reading this, that one of three things are true: 

- You lack belief now but are ether undecided and genuinely seeking/wish to understand other perspectives, or

-  You have made up your mind that God does not exist and have closed you mind to the possibility

If the latter? Why are you here and why bother? Do yourself and all of us a favor. Don't even respond. And move on..

This essay explores and truly attempts to understand why the modern atheistic stance struggles to provide coherence. Why its numbers continue to dwindle globally (Pew report, other), and why the mere fact that many atheists engage in these discussions suggests an unspoken search for something more.

The Intellectual Dishonesty of Selective Evidence

A consistent issue in discussions with some is their tendency to dismiss any evidence that does not fit their preconceived worldview. Whether it is historical, philosophical, or theological reasoning, many refuse to engage with arguments that challenge their stance. This is not an exercise in rational inquiry—it is intellectual dishonesty.

True seekers of truth examine all evidence, including both empirical data and metaphysical reasoning. Some, while often ridiculed for their faith, at least provide logical arguments for causation, morality, and purpose. Others, by contrast, often operate on a default rejection rather than a substantiated worldview. This results in what can be described as false bravado—a posture of superiority without the foundation to support it.

Blaise Pascal addressed this intellectual evasion directly:

“People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.”

When men are truly committed to intellectual rigor, they apply the same level of scrutiny to their own belief system that they demand from others. Yet, more often than not, some belief systems do not stand on reasoned arguments but on a rejection of belief—without offering a superior alternative.

Evasion Over Engagement: The Achilles’ Heel of the more Modern Atheism

Those who lack of belief in God often do not just struggle with answers—they actively evade them. One of the most glaring examples is its inability to address the origin of the universe. Historically, the most fundamental divide in human belief has been created vs. non-created—theism or materialism. If someone who lacks belief in God  asserts that the universe is uncaused, it would seem to follow that they must/would provide a rational explanation for how something came from nothing. Instead, many who lack belief in God retreat behind statements like, “We don’t need to have an answer.”

This response is both unsatisfying and self-defeating. The same persond who often demand rigorous evidence from others refuse to apply that same standard to their own worldview. If you claim no God exists or a lack of belief in God, you inherently take a stance on the universe’s existence—yet atheism and others who lack a belief in God often avoid offering a coherent answer. This intellectual retreat is why atheism as a belief in the lack of God appears hollow when weighed against other beliefs with a more structured philosophical reasoning.

This evasion was well articulated by philosopher C.S. Lewis:

“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.”

If atheism or simply lacking a belief in God were a sufficient answer, it would not require such avoidance. True intellectual honesty demands more than mere negation—it requires an alternative explanation grounded in reason.

Redefining Belief to Evade Responsibility

Another common tactic is the modification of definitions. Many atheists attempt to redefine their stance as “just a lack of belief” rather than an actual position. This appears to be done not to clarify but to evade responsibility. A belief system that refuses accountability is inherently weak. If I say to a man "I lack a belief in God (or anything for that matter)" another man is apt to say, "and why is that so?" If the answer is "I'm not obliged to tell you." The incredulous response from that other man would commonly be, "then why tell me this at all?" If your answer is you just don't why duscuss anything that can literally have no meaningful discussion?

Imagine redefining other critical beliefs in this way:

“I don’t believe in morality, but I’m not saying there’s no right or wrong.”

“I don’t believe in truth, but I’m not saying truth doesn’t exist.”

Such word games are unconvincing. True intellectual positions require justification. The refusal to engage in defining and defending a belief makes any -ism such as atheism less of a philosophy and simply more of a negation—a void where reason should be. An empty statement, a balloon without air.

William Lane Craig, a prominent philosopher and theologian, observed:

“One might think that in the face of an absence of evidence, the reasonable thing to do would be to suspend belief, not to believe the opposite. But this is not what the atheist does.”

Atheism, by redefining its stance as a mere "lack of belief," seeks to evade the burden of proof. Yet all worldviews, including atheism, require justification.

The Decline of Atheism: A Belief System in Retreat

Globally, atheism is shrinking. Data suggests that belief in God, or at least spirituality, is on the rise in most parts of the world, while atheism stagnates or declines. Why? Because atheism fails to answer life’s ultimate questions, while theism continues to provide meaning, moral grounding, and existential coherence.

The philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre noted that a worldview must not only explain reality but provide moral and existential depth:

“A central feature of moral philosophy is the question of how a rational agent might determine what to do."

If a worldview fails to satisfy the deepest human questions, why should it endure? Atheism offers no ultimate purpose, no coherent moral grounding, and no answer to life's fundamental existential dilemmas.

The Search for Meaning: Why Are You Here?

Many atheists spend their time engaging in discussions about God and faith. But why? If God does not exist, why waste time debating something meaningless? The very fact that atheists continue these discussions suggests an unspoken longing—a quiet recognition that the answers they seek may exist beyond their self-imposed limitations.

At some point, every person must ask: Why am I here? What is my purpose? What happens after death? The refusal to engage with these questions is not intellectual courage—it is quiet desperation. Consciousness itself demands more of us. Life is not merely about survival; it is about seeking meaning.

Theists embrace this pursuit, building frameworks of understanding that attempt to answer the greatest mysteries of existence. Atheism, by contrast, too often reduces itself to negation, offering nothing in return.

Fyodor Dostoevsky recognized this existential need when he wrote:

“The mystery of human existence lies not in just staying alive, but in finding something to live for.”

If atheism cannot provide a framework for why we live, it ultimately fails as a coherent worldview.

The Call to Truth

Truth is not found in arrogance or dismissal. It is not found in evasion or false bravado. It is found in the relentless pursuit of understanding, the willingness to challenge one’s assumptions, and the courage to engage with the ultimate questions of existence.

To those who claim atheism requires no answer—why not? If everything of value demands justification, why should your belief be any different? To those who say there is no purpose—why live as if there is? To those who insist God does not exist—why spend so much time engaging with Him?

The mere fact that you are in this discussion should speak louder than any argument I could make.

"When a man begins to answer these questions is when he begins living. All else is a quiet desperation."

William W Collins 

cr January, 2025