Why can't theists accept that atheist exist?

[Underseer]

There is an old latin saying, used as a motto by a number of people and groups - notably the Dukes of Saxe-Römhild, who were not as much like the Dukes of Hazard as one might imagine - for several centuries,

Si deus pro nobis, quis contra nos? which roughly translates as "If God is with us, who can be against us?"

I don't think its an 'old latin saying'.
I think it's from the bible.

But I agree entirely with your corollary.
And that God is not always with everyone who claims got mit uns.

You really think that Christians were the first ones to tell believers that they can't possibly lose a war because the gods are with them?

I guess no one else could have possibly been clever enough to think up that argument. Only an all-knowing, perfect being could possibly have come up with that particular means of motivating the gullible masses during a time of war.

 

[DrZoidberg]

This is a trend I have noticed in a ton of theists. They say that atheists reject God, rebel against God, are unfaithful to God. It is right there in the words "Infidel" and "Kaffir" (one who rejects). What is the reason behind this?

I tell them that I can't be rejecting or rebelling against God, because I see no God to reject or rebel against. I can't be unfaithful or infidel towards something that doesn't exist... but they simply won't accept that.

Is admitting that people exist who don't believe in God a threat to their own belief?
Is it merely because the holy books and preachers say it, so they believe it?
Is it just such an alien concept to them that they are actually incapable of contemplating it?
It it to justify their hatred or prejudice towards us? They have to project that we are against them?
Is it a combination of the above?
Is it something else?

There is a philosophical analog that's harder to argue away.

God can be the name of "the Big Other", in Lacanian terminology. But it's everything that isn't me and the stuff I interact with directly. It's the context within which we do stuff. God can be seen as a metaphor for that. And that will always exist. What theists have done, (according to Lacan) is anthromorphised that Big Other.

Anyhoo... that Big Other out there can't be explained away. That will always be there. Call it social norms if you will. If you're not following social norms, you are rebelling against them.

When I read Lacan I thought it all made sense. It makes it a hell of a lot easier to understand Theists and why they find atheism so hard to accept. For them it could be like denying reality.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

There is an old latin saying, used as a motto by a number of people and groups - notably the Dukes of Saxe-Römhild, who were not as much like the Dukes of Hazard as one might imagine - for several centuries,

Si deus pro nobis, quis contra nos? which roughly translates as "If God is with us, who can be against us?"

I don't think its an 'old latin saying'.
I think it's from the bible.

But I agree entirely with your corollary.
And that God is not always with everyone who claims got mit uns.

This is funny.

The phrase came before the Bible. Otherwise, it wouldn't be in the Bible. So yes, it is actually "an old Latin phrase".