A response can be constructed based on a number of arguments that reflect both the socio-psychological and ideological aspects of the attitude toward God and the denial of His existence.

Rejecting Divinity: Social, Psychological, and Ideological Perspective

A response can be constructed based on a number of arguments that reflect both the socio-psychological and ideological aspects of the attitude toward God and the denial of His existence.

Firstly, one of the sources presents the idea that it is precisely the non-acceptance of the Christian ideal—which does not enrich earthly existence—that serves as the reason for its rejection:"Why then, in such a case, is He not only denied by the world but also often violently, with fire and sword, 'purged' from the human consciousness?

Does this very ferocity not indicate the true source of the world’s rejection of the Christian ideal of life? ... On the contrary, the rejection of Him as an ideal and the meaning of life, by not enriching a person’s earthly existence in any way, deprives him of everything in eternity, assuming God exists." (source: link txt)

Secondly, arguments related to human pride are put forward. The refusal of God is interpreted as a consequence of the perception of one’s independence and subjective importance, as illustrated by the following assertion:
"Why, then, on earth, did unbelievers suddenly appear out of nowhere? How long has humanity existed, and suddenly there appeared people who brazenly claim that there is no God. ... Man turned away from God out of pride, and therefore there is no sin more terrible." (source: link txt)

Thirdly, emphasis is placed on the subjective experience of a person, in which there is no room for God. Thus, the denial of God is explained by the limitations of personal life experience and the perception of the world through a narrow, often rationalistic viewpoint:
"Because in his experience there is no place for God. Meanwhile, he imagines that his experience is the only true, healthy, normal, exemplary one, while we assert that his experience, on the contrary, is one-sided, meager, restricted, flat, erroneous; and that, consequently, the absence of God in his experience means nothing other than that his experience is impoverished." (source: link txt)

Furthermore, there is a position according to which the refusal of God can be interpreted as part of a dialectical process, where the departure of God from the world is seen as a necessary stage that liberates humanity from the "slave" notions of Him produced by traditional socio-cultural structures:
"The fate of the world and man is mysteriously effected through godlessness, through the departure of God from the world. ... Godlessness can even be beneficial and may serve as a purification and liberation from the slavish notions of God, distorted by sociomorphism." (source: link txt)

Thus, the arguments explaining the abrupt attitude toward God and the denial of His existence include the following considerations:
1. The rejection of the Christian ideal and the refusal of a spiritual meaning that, according to critics, does not enrich earthly life.
2. An emphasized pride, where a person, by exalting his freedom and individuality, rejects God as an external authority and ideal.
3. The absence of experience or the inability to incorporate the concept of God within the framework of personal perception, making the denial of God a logical consequence of a narrow psychological and rational approach.
4. An ideological reaction against traditional, often outdated, representations of God, which seem ill-suited to modern realities.