INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 190

www.rsisinternational.org

Atheism Across Abrahamic Faiths: A Theoretical Analysis into

Islamic, Jewish and Christian Perspectives

Kauthar Razali

Faculty of General Studies and Advanced Education, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Gong Badak

Campus, 21300, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.930000025

Received: 10 December 2025; Accepted: 16 December 2025; Published: 25 December 2025

ABSTRACT

This article examines how atheism is understood and theologically assessed within the three main Abrahamic

religions: Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. Although all three affirm belief in a transcendent, personal God and

normatively reject atheism, their approaches to unbelief are shaped by distinct doctrinal structures, historical

trajectories and socio-cultural contexts. Using a qualitative, comparative-theological design, the study employs

textual and conceptual analysis of scriptural, classical and contemporary theological sources from each tradition.

The findings suggest that Islamic discourse usually frames atheism in terms of tauhid, kufr, and ilhad. These

terms are used to characterise a broad denial of God, prophecy, revelation, and the unseen, with significant

doctrinal, legal and communal consequences. Jewish perspectives, by contrast, often locate atheism within a

covenantal and communal matrix, employing notions such as kofer be’ikkar, min and apikoros to describe

various forms of unbelief, while allowing for the persistence of Jewish identity alongside explicit non-belief.

Historically, Christian thought has addressed atheism under the rubrics of heresy and apostasy, and, in modernity,

has engaged with it intensively through philosophical apologetics, ethical critique, and reflection on the problem

of evil. The study concludes that atheism functions as a revealing point of contrast across the Abrahamic faiths,

exposing shared concerns about truth, morality and salvation. In addition, it highlights divergent theological

logics and response strategies. The article offers a structured comparative framework that can guide further

interfaith dialogue and modern discussions between religious and atheistic worldviews.

Keywords: Islam, Judaism, Jewish, Christian, Atheism, Abrahamic Faith

INTRODUCTION

This research examines the relationship between atheism and the Abrahamic faiths, Islam, Judaism and

Christianity, highlighting the shared monotheistic foundations. Although most scholarly work overlooks the

development of atheism within Jewish history, focusing instead on Classical and Christian ideas, this study seeks

to address that gap. It explores the distinctive philosophical and theological issues that lead to non-belief in all

three traditions. The universal presence of a supreme deity in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, despite differences

in its interpretation, provides a valuable framework for understanding atheistic challenges. This comparative

method is essential for understanding how each tradition has historically understood and addressed disbelief,

ranging from outright denials of divine existence to more subtle forms of scepticism, additionally, by examining

the historical development of "atheism" within each Abrahamic faith. This transitioned from denying specific

deities to a broader repudiation of all religious systems. Atheism and related forms of non-religion are no longer

marginal phenomena in contemporary public life. Global surveys indicate that the religiously unaffiliated (often

called “nones”) grew from about 1.6 billion people in 2010 to about 1.9 billion in 2020, rising from roughly 23%

to 24% of the world’s population; this broad unaffiliated category includes self-identified atheists and agnostics

as well as those with no particular religious identity (Strawn, 2019).

These shifts renew the urgency of asking how major religious traditions interpret unbelief, not only as an abstract

philosophical claim, but also as a lived social reality shaped by institutions, law, communal boundary-making,

and modern cultural change. Within the Abrahamic religions, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity share a

commitment to a transcendent, personal God. Nevertheless, they have developed distinct doctrinal grammars for

naming disbelief and distinct repertoires for responding to doubt, disaffiliation, and explicit atheism. The rise of

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 191

www.rsisinternational.org

atheism in contemporary discussions, particularly in Muslim-majority societies, underscores the importance of

examining how these traditions address the absence of belief (Samuri & Quraishi, 2014). The rise of secularism,

modernity, and philosophical scepticism in recent centuries has heightened the salience of atheism as a

theological and sociocultural issue, prompting renewed reflection within religious scholarship (Shepherd, 2020).

In Islamic theology (ʿilm al-kalam), atheism is typically viewed not only as a denial of divine existence but also

as a rejection of the prophetic message and the moral framework established by divine revelation (Khairuddin,

2022). The Qur’anic discourse often addresses disbelievers (kuffar) in theological and ethical terms,

distinguishing between ignorance, obstinacy and outright denial. By contrast, Jewish thought, especially within

classical Rabbinic literature, approaches atheism more through the lens of covenantal breach and communal

identity, rather than purely metaphysical denial. While explicit discussions of atheism are less prevalent in early

Jewish texts, modern Jewish philosophy has grappled with atheism, particularly in the aftermath of the

Enlightenment and the Holocaust. Christianity, historically intertwined with Greco-Roman philosophical

traditions, developed a range of responses to atheism, from Patristic apologetics to modern existential theology.

Christian theological engagement with atheism has often centred on the problem of evil, human autonomy and

the crisis of faith (Gasparov, 2022). This article begins by clarifying four key concepts. It uses atheism primarily

in its philosophical sense as the denial of God's existence, while also recognising its common psychological

interpretation as a lack of theistic belief.

Unbelief is an umbrella term encompassing atheism, agnosticism, and various forms of practical indifference.

Religious disaffiliation refers to the sociological process of abandoning a religious identity, which does not

necessarily mean atheism. Secularism is presented as a political principle concerning the relationship between

religion and public authority, whereas secularisation describes broader social processes that can weaken the

influence of religious institutions. Building on these definitions, the paper offers a comparative-theological

analysis of how each tradition interprets atheism within its own categories, references unbelief in classical

sources, and redefines these concepts in modern contexts in which debates over science, morality, suffering and

political power have intensified. The goal is not to determine which tradition is “correct” but to provide a

balanced comparative framework that highlights similarities and differences, fostering more meaningful

dialogue between religious and non-religious perspectives (Castel, 2016).

Problem Statement

Existing literature often treats atheism either in general philosophical terms or within the scope of a single

religious tradition, with limited exploration of how these faiths engage with atheism in different ways across

scripture, theology and ethical discourse (Dodds, 2009). This lack of comparative theological analysis hinders a

fuller understanding of the nuanced ways in which atheism is framed within Abrahamic thought. In Islamic

discourse, atheism is often framed as a violation of tawḥid and an existential threat to the social and moral fabric

of Muslim societies. This is especially evident in the Muslim context, where the rise of atheistic thought among

former Muslims is driven by rationalist, existentialist and humanist ideologies, which have prompted strong

institutional responses and calls for theological reassertion (Duile, 2018). Conversely, Judaism, while affirming

belief in God as central to traditional halakhic life, exhibits greater historical and cultural tolerance of internal

dissent, scepticism, and even non-theistic identity, particularly within modern and secular Jewish movements

(Werczberger & Azulay, 2011). Christianity, with its long tradition of philosophical apologetics and existential

theology, often treats atheism as both a doctrinal rejection and an opportunity for spiritual dialogue (Mantsinen

& Tervo-Niemelä, 2020).

Although atheism is increasingly linked to contemporary phenomena such as secularisation, scepticism, and

disaffiliation, comparative work often remains textual and normative, engaging less with contemporary atheist

arguments and self-understandings, and with empirical scholarship on how unbelief is lived and narrated in

different settings (Haushofer & Reisinger, 2019). Despite these developments, current scholarship tends to

address atheism within isolated religious frameworks or general philosophical terms, without systematically

comparing theological responses across Islam, Judaism and Christianity. This gap limits interreligious

understanding and obscures the unique ways each tradition addresses contemporary challenges related to

secularism, disbelief, and post-religious identities.

Therefore, this study seeks to investigate the divergent theological responses to atheism within Islam, Judaism,

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 192

www.rsisinternational.org

and Christianity, focusing on both classical doctrinal positions and modern reinterpretations. By examining these

perspectives through a comparative theological lens, the paper aims to contribute to a more comprehensive and

contextualised understanding of atheism within the Abrahamic religious framework. Moreover, it limits the

capacity for interfaith dialogue on shared challenges posed by secularism, scepticism and religious disaffiliation

in contemporary societies. Addressing this gap is essential not only for advancing theological scholarship but

also for fostering constructive engagement among religious and non-religious communities.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopts a qualitative, comparative-theological research design. It is theoretical in nature and relies

primarily on textual and conceptual analysis of key Islamic, Jewish and Christian sources that address atheism

or disbelief in God. Primary sources consist of authoritative texts from each tradition. For Islam, these include

the Qur’an, selected ḥadīth, classical works of ‘ilm al-kalam and usul al-din that discuss kufr, ilhad and related

concepts, as well as contemporary Muslim writings that respond to atheism in modern contexts. In Judaism, the

primary sources are the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), Rabbinic literature (Mishnah, Talmud, Midrash), and

representative medieval and modern Jewish philosophers who address doubt, covenant, and secularism. For

Christianity, the primary sources comprise the New Testament, patristic and medieval theological texts and

modern or contemporary Christian authors who explicitly engage with atheism and secular worldviews.

Secondary sources include peer-reviewed journal articles, academic monographs, theses, and reference works in

theology, religious studies, and comparative religion. These are used to provide historical context, clarify

doctrinal frameworks, and identify ongoing scholarly debates on atheism and Abrahamic faiths. Texts are

selected using purposive sampling. They are selected because they are influential within their traditions,

represent prominent views on unbelief, and cover different historical periods (classical, modern, and

contemporary).

These themes are coded and synthesised to create a clear theological profile of each tradition’s position on

atheism. Second, the three profiles are compared within a shared framework. Similarities and differences are

examined with respect to terminology, doctrinal focus, tolerance of doubt, and the balance between individual

belief and communal identity. This comparison shows where the traditions agree (for example, in seeing atheism

as a serious spiritual issue) and where they differ (for instance, in how much atheism is regarded as a legal,

communal, or existential matter). Finally, the results are discussed through a constructive theological reflection,

highlighting implications for interfaith dialogue and contemporary engagement with secularism and ex-believer

phenomena.

Comparative Perspectives on Atheism in Islam, Judaism and Christianity

This comparative analysis highlights both the shared concerns of the Abrahamic faiths regarding atheism and the

distinctive ways in which each tradition has responded to it. All three affirm belief in a transcendent, personal

God and generally regard atheism as a serious theological and moral deviation. However, their engagements

with unbelief have followed different socio-intellectual trajectories. In Muslim-majority contexts, overt atheism

tends to be perceived primarily as a direct challenge to tawḥid and to the religiously informed social order,

eliciting responses that are simultaneously theological, legal and communal. In Judaism, modern discourse has

often framed the issue more in terms of secularisation and cultural or ethnic continuity than in terms of explicit

doctrinal atheism, allowing for the persistence of strong Jewish identity alongside religious non-belief.

Christianity, shaped by its long history of philosophical apologetics and its deep entanglement with Western

modernity, has commonly approached atheism through rational argument, pastoral dialogue and existential

reflection, especially in relation to questions of suffering, meaning and autonomy. Together, these patterns show

that while Islam, Judaism and Christianity converge in rejecting atheism at the level of doctrine, they articulate

and manage that rejection through differing historical experiences, institutional structures and cultural contexts.

Islamic Perspective

Within the Islamic tradition, atheism is generally understood as a direct negation of tawḥīd (the oneness of God)

and a deviation from the innate human disposition (fiṭrah) to believe in a Creator. The Qur’an repeatedly affirms

that recognition of God is rooted in human nature and in reflection upon creation. Therefore, denial of God is

seen not only as an intellectual error but as a moral and spiritual failure. Atheism thus represents a rupture in the

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 193

www.rsisinternational.org

foundational relationship between God and the human being, with consequences for both personal salvation and

the ethical order of society (BAKKAR et al., 2020)

Classical Islamic scholarship distinguishes several categories related to disbelief. Terms such as kufr (disbelief),

ilḥād (deviation, usually associated with denial of God or distortion of religious truths), and zandaqah (heresy)

are used to describe different forms of doctrinal deviation. Atheism, in the strict sense, is the denial of any divine

reality and is included within these broader categories. Early Muslim theologians and jurists debated the status

of those who deny God, revelation, or the Hereafter, and generally agreed that such positions contradict the

essential pillars of iman (faith). In this view, atheism is not regarded as a neutral philosophical choice but rather

as a rejection of revealed truth and the guidance of prophets.

Historically, the Islamic intellectual tradition encountered ideas resembling atheism through certain

philosophical, literary, and heterodox currents. Some individuals openly mocked religious beliefs, questioned

prophecy, or reduced the world to purely material causes. These tendencies were critically examined by

mutakallimūn (theologians) and other scholars, who developed rational arguments for God’s existence, the

necessity of revelation, and the coherence of belief in the unseen. The discipline of ʿilm al-kalam emerged, in

part, as a systematic response to such challenges, integrating reason and revelation to defend the core doctrines

of Islam against both internal deviations and external philosophies. (Khairuddin, 2022; Mujib & Hamim, 2021).

In modern times, Islamic discussions of atheism are often shaped by encounters with secularism, scientific

materialism and globalised critiques of religion. Contemporary Muslim scholars highlight a range of factors that

may contribute to atheistic tendencies, including misunderstandings of religious teachings, perceived

contradictions between science and faith, moral objections to believers' behaviour, and broader cultural pressures

toward individual autonomy and relativism. While acknowledging these sociological and psychological

dimensions, Islamic thought continues to frame atheism primarily as a theological problem: a denial of God,

prophecy and the unseen that undermines the comprehensive worldview of Islam (Friawan et al., 2020).

At the same time, contemporary Islamic responses to atheism are not limited to legal or condemnatory

approaches. Many scholars and daʿwah movements emphasise pastoral, educational and dialogical strategies,

seeking to address doubts through intellectual engagement, spiritual nurturing and ethical example. Atheism is

thus approached as both an intellectual challenge, requiring robust rational and scriptural argumentation, and a

spiritual crisis, requiring renewed attention to the heart, character formation and the lived embodiment of Islamic

values. In this way, the Islamic perspective on atheism remains firmly rooted in the defence of tawḥīd, while also

recognising the complex personal and societal factors that shape modern disbelief.

Judaism Perspective

In Jewish thought, atheism is often discussed less as a standalone metaphysical thesis and more as a spectrum of

challenges to covenant, Torah authority and communal belonging. Rather than a single equivalent of “atheism,”

rabbinic and later Jewish sources deploy categories such as kofer be’ikkar, min, and apikoros to mark different

kinds of denial (e.g., denial of providence, revelation, or resurrection) and to negotiate the boundaries of the

community. This section, therefore, clarifies these terms and their limits as translations of modern “atheism,”

outlines classical and early-modern episodes where unbelief is framed as covenantal breach and communal

deviance, and highlights modern configurations, especially secularisation, cultural Judaism, and post-

Holocausttheology, in which “belonging” can persist alongside explicit non-belief. Attention is also given to how

social and political settings (diaspora, emancipation, Zionism, and communal institutions) shape the tone and

function of Jewish responses to unbelief.(Langton, 2024)

Historically, one of the most common forms of “atheist” in Jewish discourse has been the imagined or rhetorical

unbeliever constructed within scriptural and rabbinic texts. The “fool” of Psalm 14, who says in his heart that

there is no God, or the sceptical figures portrayed in the writings of Philo and Josephus, exemplify a type of

practical atheism: people who live as if God does not see or judge, even if they do not formulate a systematic

philosophical denial of God. Rabbinic literature similarly discusses figures who deny providence, reward and

punishment, or the authority of Torah, presenting them as internal threats to the covenantal community. Such

portrayals serve primarily didactic and pastoral functions; they warn the faithful against patterns of life and

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 194

www.rsisinternational.org

thought that amount to treating God as absent or irrelevant, even when explicit metaphysical atheism is not

articulated.

Alongside these rhetorical constructions, Jewish history records individuals who were accused of atheism by

their contemporaries because they challenged key theological assumptions. Thinkers such as Uriel da Costa,

Juan de Prado and, especially, Baruch Spinoza were condemned as minims or apikoros for rejecting traditional

doctrines of revelation, immortality, or divine intervention in history. Whether or not these figures were “atheists”

in the strict modern sense, their critical stances toward Torah, providence and the supernatural were perceived

as functionally atheistic within the communal framework. Their cases highlight the fact that in Judaism, atheism

has often been negotiated through intra-Jewish polemics over the limits of acceptable reinterpretation of God,

law and peoplehood (Langton, 2024)

A further complexity arises in the case of major Jewish philosophers who remained personally theistic yet

developed theological models that inadvertently created conceptual space for later atheism. Thinkers such as

Maimonides and Gersonides, with strong negative theology and rationalist accounts of providence and miracle,

emphasised divine transcendence and unknowability to such an extent that God could become increasingly

abstract and philosophically distant. While these authors did not deny God, their reconceptualisation of divine

attributes and action made possible later positions in which “God” is reduced to a symbol, a process, or an ethical

ideal and, for some readers, to explicit non-belief. In this way, intellectual tools associated with Jewish orthodoxy

could also become resources for heterodoxy and later forms of Jewish atheism (Berkovitz, 2024).

In the modern and contemporary eras, Jewish engagement with atheism is further reshaped by secularisation,

science and the traumatic events of the twentieth century, particularly the Holocaust. The emergence of secular

Zionism and culturally Jewish but religiously non-observant identities shows that atheism or agnosticism does

not necessarily entail a rupture with Jewish peoplehood. One can be a “Jewish atheist” in the sense of rejecting

belief in a personal, transcendent God while retaining a strong attachment to Jewish history, culture and national

identity. Parallel to this sociological development, some modern Jewish theologians, such as Mordecai Kaplan

and, later, Holocaust theologians, proposed non-supernatural or “post-theistic” conceptions of God as the sum

of the forces that make for salvation, or as a symbolic expression of ethical commitment. These moves provoked

accusations of atheism from more traditional quarters, yet they also indicate how Jewish theology itself has been

reshaped under the pressure of atheistic and secular critiques. Within Jewish populations in the United States (as

one prominent case study), 27% of U.S. Jews identify as “Jews of no religion” (e.g., atheist, agnostic, or “nothing

in particular”), illustrating that disaffiliation can occur alongside continuing Jewish identification and belonging

(Strawn, 2019).

Taken together, these patterns suggest that, in the Jewish context, atheism is less a clean external opposition and

more a continuum of internal negotiation around belief, doubt and covenantal belonging. Unbelief is often

evaluated not only in metaphysical terms, whether God exists, but also in relational and communal terms:

whether one remains within the orbit of Torah, peoplehood and historical responsibility (Berkovitz, 2024).This

distinguishes the Jewish experience from some Islamic treatments, where atheism is more clearly framed as a

violation of tawhid and communal religious law and from specific Christian approaches that emphasise

apologetic and existential responses to atheism. For the present comparative study, the Jewish case demonstrates

that an Abrahamic religion can accommodate persistent forms of atheism and agnosticism within its social body,

thereby complicating any simple binary between “faith” and “unbelief” across the Abrahamic traditions.

Christian Perspectives

Within Christianity, atheism has historically been interpreted through the intertwined categories of heresy and

apostasy, especially in periods when ecclesial authority was closely linked to social and political order. In

modernity, however, atheism increasingly appears as a philosophical and cultural movement, as well as a

sociological phenomenon connected to secularisation and religious disaffiliation. This section, therefore,

clarifies the classical Christian vocabulary for unbelief and “falling away,” traces how church–state relations and

disciplinary practices shaped the perceived threat of “godlessness,” and surveys contemporary Christian

engagements with atheism ranging from analytic apologetics and pastoral dialogue to sustained debates with

“New Atheism” and moral objections grounded in the problem of evil. In doing so, it highlights how theological

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 195

www.rsisinternational.org

argumentation and institutional power dynamics jointly influence Christian responses to unbelief (Gasparov,

2022).

Historically, the “heresy/apostasy” framework often meant that explicit denial of God was not treated as a distinct

philosophical stance but as the most radical form of religious and moral deviance, an offence against both divine

order and civic stability. In early modern Britain, denial of core doctrines could be prosecuted under heresy or

blasphemy statutes, sometimes with severe penalties. For example, Edward Wightman was burned in 1612 for

heresy, an episode that illustrates how doctrinal deviance could still be imagined as a public threat requiring

exemplary punishment. Even after burning for heresy waned, public sanction for blasphemy persisted. In

Scotland, Thomas Aikenhead was executed in 1697 for blasphemy, widely described as the last execution for

blasphemy in Great Britain. These cases support the broader point that Christian societies have at times

constructed “atheism” not merely as an intellectual error but as a destabilising force that justified legal coercion

is revealing the deep entanglement of theology with institutional authority and state power (Edwards, 2013).

However, with the Reformation and later the Enlightenment, the landscape shifted: theological debates over

salvation and grace (e.g., Calvinist versus Arminian views on whether believers can fall away) were accompanied

by new currents of liberalism and secular humanism that openly challenged Christian belief. Modern processes

of secularisation in Europe, along with complex phenomena such as “believing without belonging” and

“belonging without believing,” have further blurred the boundary between cultural Christianity and explicit

nonbelief, prompting churches to reconsider how they interpret leaving the faith and adopting atheistic or

nonreligious identities (Mantsinen & Tervo-Niemelä, 2020).

Contemporary empirical data make clear why these conceptual shifts matter for Christian responses to atheism.

In the United States, for instance, Pew Research Centre (2025) reports that the religiously unaffiliated (“nones”)

are about 29% of adults in recent surveys; this includes people identifying explicitly as atheist or agnostic as

well as those reporting “nothing in particular.” Pew also notes that Christianity’s long decline has slowed and

may have levelled off in the 2023–24 Religious Landscape Study, which reframes “atheism” not only as a

philosophical challenge but also as part of a broader ecology of disaffiliation, switching, and hybrid identities.

These trends reinforce a central analytical point: in contemporary contexts, Christian engagement with atheism

is shaped not only by arguments about God’s existence but also by institutional questions concerning authority,

credibility, social trust, and the conditions under which religious belonging is sustained or lost (Pew Research

Centre, 2025).

A second line of contemporary Christian thought focuses on the problem of evil as a key point of contact with

atheism. Igor Gasparov (2022) reconstructs an argument and then evaluates it from a philosophical-theistic

perspective. Gasparov contends that, while an atheist effectively challenges Christian theism on the moral

credibility of its concept of God, his constraints on what a just God must do in response to evil and his rejection

of traditional theistic responses (free will, soul-making, sceptical theism) are not entirely convincing (Gasparov,

2022).

Against this backdrop, contemporary Christian engagement with atheism is shaped strongly by philosophical

and ethical debate. Aaron Shepherd (2020) analyses the so-called “New Atheism” of figures such as Dawkins,

Harris, Hitchens, and Dennett as presenting a “threefold challenge” to religion: epistemic (religion is irrational),

moral (religion is harmful), and practical (religion is socially dangerous). He argues that much analytic

philosophy of religion, which focuses on abstract arguments for God’s existence, is poorly equipped to address

this challenge. Instead, he proposes a pragmatic Christian response that evaluates religious and atheistic

worldviews in terms of their lived consequences, moral practices and capacity to foster human flourishing,

reframing the debate away from purely theoretical proofs toward experiential and communal outcomes

(Shepherd, 2020).

The existence of such detailed intra-philosophical debate shows that many Christian thinkers regard atheism,

particularly “ethical atheism” rooted in moral protest, as a serious rational and moral challenge that warrants

thoughtful theological and philosophical responses. Overall, these materials indicate that Christian views on

atheism operate on two linked levels. Historically, atheism was frequently treated as apostasy or extreme heresy,

an offence against the sacramental and communal life of the Church, often mediated through law and public

discipline. In modernity, atheism is engaged as both a philosophical interlocutor and a sociological reality, raising

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 196

www.rsisinternational.org

questions about rationality, morality, suffering, and the credibility of institutions in secular societies. Modern

Christian responses thus range from pragmatic assessments of the lived consequences of belief and unbelief to

sophisticated philosophical argumentation on evil and divine justice, demonstrating that Christianity’s

engagement with atheism is not only defensive but also reflective, prompting ongoing reconsideration of how

God, salvation and human freedom are articulated under conditions of secularisation and disaffiliation.

Comparative Findings: Atheism in Islam, Judaism and Christianity

The comparative analysis shows that Islam, Judaism and Christianity share a common normative stance towards

atheism as a serious deviation from belief in a transcendent, personal God. However, they conceptualise and

respond to it in significantly different ways. In all three traditions, denial of God is not merely an intellectual

position; it is regarded as a disruption of the proper relationship between human beings and the divine, with

implications for moral responsibility, communal life, and ultimate destiny. Nevertheless, the theological

categories used to describe unbelief, the boundaries between heterodoxy and atheism, and the strategies adopted

in response are shaped by distinct doctrinal structures and historical experiences.

In the Islamic tradition, atheism is mainly viewed through the lens of tawḥīd and ʿaqīdah. It falls under broader

categories such as kufr, ilḥād, and zandaqah, which are seen as a complete rejection of God, prophecy, revelation,

and the unseen. The response has been primarily doctrinal and juridical, reinforced by the disciplines of kalām

and fiqh, often linked to concerns about maintaining the integrity of a religiously guided social order. Judaism,

on the other hand, tends to place atheism within a covenantal and communal context. Different forms of unbelief

are discussed under the headings of kofer be’ikkar, min, and apikoros. Nevertheless, the focus frequently shifts

from abstract metaphysical denial to faithfulness to Torah, peoplehood, and historical responsibility. Modern

Jewish experience allows for a strong Jewish identity to coexist with explicit non-belief, resulting in a range

from internal heresy and radical reinterpretation to openly secular or atheistic positions that remain culturally

Jewish.

Traditionally, Christians have regarded the denial of God as heresy and apostasy, highlighting the deviation from

the Church and faith in Christ. In recent times, particularly in Western societies, Christian engagement with

atheism has been significantly influenced by philosophical apologetics, debates over rationality and science, and

extensive discussions on the problem of evil (Mantsinen & Tervo-Niemelä, 2020). Modern Christian responses

range from logical arguments for the existence of God, through ethical and pragmatic critiques of atheism, to

pastoral and existential approaches to doubt and moral protest against God. This gives Christian discourse on

atheism a difference between defining doctrinal boundaries and fostering open dialogue.

Across the three traditions, several convergences are evident. All affirm that atheism undermines the coherence

of their respective worldviews; all link unbelief to moral and spiritual consequences; and all have produced

intellectual resources to defend belief, whether in the form of kalām, rabbinic and philosophical reflection, or

Christian apologetics and systematic theology. Nevertheless, the divergences are equally important. Islam

emphasises the protection of tauḥīd and the legal-moral order; Judaism emphasises covenant, text and communal

belonging. Meanwhile, Christianity emphasises faith in Christ and the credibility of God in the face of suffering

and modern critique. These differences suggest that atheism is not a single, uniform challenge across the

Abrahamic traditions, but is refracted through the particular theological, legal and socio-historical configurations

of each faith.

CONCLUSION

This study aimed to examine atheism is understood and engaged with within Islam, Judaism, and Christianity,

highlighting both shared patterns and unique differences. Using a qualitative, comparative-theological approach.

It analysed key doctrinal themes and historical developments in each tradition, focusing on how unbelief is

named, evaluated, and addressed. The findings suggest that while all three Abrahamic faiths share a monotheistic

foundation and a normative rejection of atheism, they differ significantly in how they interpret and respond to it.

Islam generally views atheism as a serious violation of tawḥīd and a negation of the pillars of īmān, requiring

responses that are theological, legal, and communal. Judaism, shaped by its covenantal self-understanding and

diasporic history, often approaches atheism through fidelity to the Torah and peoplehood, resulting in complex

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS) 
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue  
 
Page 197 
www.rsisinternational.org 
 
 
 
 
configurations  in  which  religious  belief,  practice,  and  identity  do  not  always  align.  Christianity,  deeply 
intertwined with Western intellectual traditions, confronts atheism not only as apostasy from church life but also 
as a philosophical and ethical challenge- particularly regarding rationality, morality, and the problem of evil.  
Compared with other traditions, the study shows that atheism serves as a “mirror,” revealing each tradition's core 
commitments  and  vulnerabilities.  Islamic  responses  emphasise  the  unity  of  divine  law;  Jewish  responses 
highlight the tension between belief and belonging; Christian responses stress the credibility of God's goodness 
and  presence  within  a  secular,  pluralist  society.  Recognising these  differences does  not  diminish  the  shared 
concern of the Abrahamic religions with unbelief; rather, it clarifies that there is no single Abrahamic model for 
engaging with atheism, but multiple, historically conditioned patterns.  
The research contributes to theology and religious studies by offering a structured comparative framework for 
understanding atheism across the Abrahamic faiths, moving beyond analyses of individual traditions or purely 
philosophical approaches. It also indicates that meaningful dialogue between believers and atheists, as well as 
among  the  three  religions,  depends  on  understanding  these  internal  logics  rather  than  assuming  a  uniform 
“religion versus atheism” dichotomy. Future research could build on this theoretical foundation by conducting 
empirical studies of contemporary Muslim, Jewish, and Christian communities to explore how these classical 
and modern theological patterns are reflected, challenged, or transformed in lived experience.  
REFERENCES  
1.  BAKKAR,  Y.  A.,  Man,  S.,  &  Binti  Abdul  Khalil,  S.  (2020).  Ø¶ÙˆØ§Ø¨Ø· 
Ø§Ù„ØaÙƒÙ&#129;ÙŠØ±ØŒ  Ø¨ÙŠÙ†  Ø§Ù„ØaØ£ØµÙŠÙ„  ÙˆØ§Ù„ØaÙ†Ø2ÙŠÙ„.  Malaysian 
Journal of Syariah and Law, 8(2), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol8no2.240  
2.  Berkovitz, J. R. (2024). Reconsidering Early Modern Jewry: Reflections on the Methodology of Legal 
History. Jewish History, 37(3–4), 209–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10835-024-09460-6  
3.  Castel, J.-P. (2016). La destruction des dieux d’autrui, une singularité abrahamique. Topique, n° 134(1), 
121–138. https://doi.org/10.3917/top.134.0121  
4.  Dodds, A. (2009). The Abrahamic faiths? Continuity and discontinuity in Christian and Islamic doctrine. 
Evangelical Quarterly, 81(3), 230–253. https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-08103003  
5.  Duile,  T.  (2018).  Atheism  in  Indonesia.  South  East  Asia  Research,  26(2),  161–175. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/0967828X18770481  
6.  Edwards, D. (2013). Toleration and the English blasphemy law. Aspects of Toleration, 75–98.  
7.  Friawan, M. S., Abd. Latif, F., & Saged, A. A. G. (2020). Causes of the New Atheism: A Study on its 
Understanding Among Universities Students in Amman, Jordan. Jurnal Akidah & Pemikiran Islam, 185–
222. https://doi.org/10.22452/afkar.sp2020no2.7  
8.  Gasparov, I. G. (2022). “Ethical Argument” Against God’s Existence: Some Critical Conciderations. 
Chelovek, 33(4), 58. https://doi.org/10.31857/S023620070021628-7  
9.  Haushofer,  J.,  &  Reisinger,  J.  (2019).  Atheist  primes  reduce  religiosity  and  subjective  wellbeing. 
Religion, Brain & Behavior, 9(2), 126–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2018.1436585  
10.  Khairuddin,  W.  H.  (2022).  Ateisme  dalam  Wacana  Ilmu  Kalam.  International  Journal  of  Islamic 
Thought, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.24035/ijit.22.2022.246  
11.  Langton, D. R. (2024). The Non-Believing Jew: A Historical Survey of Judaism’s Engagement with 
Atheism.  International  Journal  for  the  Study  of  Skepticism,  1–19. 
https://doi.org/10.1163/22105700bja10081  
12.  Mantsinen, T. T., & Tervo-Niemelä, K. (2020). Leaving Christianity. In Handbook of Leaving Religion 
(pp. 67–80). BRILL. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004331471_007  
13.  Mujib, L. S. B., & Hamim, K. (2021). Religious freedom and Riddah through the Maqāṣidī interpretation 
of  Ibn  ‘Āshūr.  HTS  Teologiese  Studies  /  Theological  Studies,  77(4). 
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v77i4.6928  
14.  Pew  Research  Center.  (2025,  February  26).  Religious  identity  in  the  United  States. 
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/02/26/religious-landscape-study-religious-identity/  
15.  Samuri, M. A. A., & Quraishi, M. (2014). Negotiating Apostasy: Applying to “Leave Islam” in Malaysia. 
Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations, 25(4), 507–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/09596410.2014.907054  

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XXX December 2025 | Special Issue

Page 198

www.rsisinternational.org

16. Shepherd, A. P. (2020). Challenging the New Atheism. Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429331411

17. Strawn, K. D. (2019). What’s Behind the “Nones‐sense”? Change Over Time in Factors Predicting

Likelihood of Religious Nonaffiliation in the United States. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,

58(3), 707–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/jssr.12609

18. Werczberger, R., & Azulay, N. (2011). The Jewish Renewal Movement in Israeli Secular Society.

Contemporary Jewry, 31(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12397-011-9063-x