Tell me if you’ve seen this before. A Christian apologist barges into an online Atheist space, hurls an avalanche of Bible verses at strangers with an online post, then accuses everyone else of secret wickedness when the crowd refuses to kneel. You scroll on in frustration, or you unload a sarcastic reply to the apologist that earns a momentary cheer from other Atheists, yet leaves the intruder unchanged. Why does this scene repeat so predictably across the internet, on a nearly daily basis in online Atheist spaces and occupy much of the time of moderators?
While most Atheists dismiss this behavior as merely a single Christian’s desire to harass Atheists, I rarely see anyone within the Atheist community consider why this phenomenon is so commonplace. I think it is worthwhile to consider that the offenders may be gripped by a poorly recognized psychiatric torment called Scrupulosity.
What is Scrupulosity?
Psychologists define Scrupulosity as a subtype of obsessive-compulsive disorder centered on religious or moral fear. The International OCD Foundation puts it plainly: “Scrupulosity is a subtype of obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) involving religious or moral obsessions”.
Per the popular model of understanding of Scrupulosity, unlike the “mentally healthy” believer who prays to their god out of affection, the scrupulous sufferer prays to quell their terror of that god. For those afflicted with this psychosis, faith becomes a battlefield of the mind in which every stray thought might condemn the soul. The vigilance never relaxes, and the conscience never acquits. It results in a state of psychological distress for the afflicted.
While the phenomenon is not heavily studied in comparison to other more well known forms of OCD, there is some research. Dr Jonathan Abramowitz, whose research anchors modern understanding of the problem, writes in his 2014 paper Scrupulosity: A cognitive–behavioral analysis and implications for treatment that, “Scrupulosity involves obsessive religious doubts and fears, unwanted blasphemous thoughts and images, as well as compulsive religious rituals, reassurance seeking and avoidance”.
These words should stand out to any rational reader, because it mirrors the very behaviors that most alienate Atheists from their devout neighbors—ritual repetition, public confession, relentless attempts to convert or correct others and punishing avoidance of “unclean” ideas. There is often a noticeable kind of desperation in the tone of the writings of those apologetics who invade Atheist online spaces which cannot be easily explained by the notion the apologetic only wishes to convert random strangers to their religion, but is more directly explained by the notion they are proselytizing out of some obsessively compelling desire to do so in order to alleviate some imagined grievance they have committed against their god.
Dr. Abramowitz further writes,
“Although beliefs about the importance and need to control intrusive thoughts probably result from multiple factors, some authors have suggested that religious doctrine can foster such beliefs because it (a) imposes explicit moral standards for thinking and behaving, (b) is inculcated by influential authority figures (e.g., clergy), and (c) includes the possibility of severe punishment (e.g., eternal damnation).”
Furthermore, a recent 2024 psychometrics paper titled The scrupulosity obsessions and compulsions scale: A measurement of scrupulosity within an OCD framework published in the Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders found that,
“Scrupulosity has been defined as “persistent doubts and irresistible urges to perform excessive religious behavior”……
Individuals with scrupulosity may experience intrusive blasphemous, sexual images, or fears that they have violated, or will violate, their religious or moral standards…
To reduce guilt, anxiety, and negative feelings surrounding these intrusive thoughts, individuals with scrupulosity will often engage in excessive religious or moral behaviors…
These behaviors might include repetitive prayers and readings of religious texts, confession, reassurance seeking (Abramowitz & Jacoby, 2014) or excessive apologizing….
Scrupulosity is commonly misdiagnosed (Glazier, 2014). Although some consider it to be a distinct psychological disorder (Miller & Hedges, 2008), because of the psychopathological pattern of intrusive thoughts and compulsive behaviors that often exist within scrupulosity, it is often considered to fall within the framework of obsessive-compulsive disorder”…
While religiosity itself does not cause OCD, in a highly religious individual who develops OCD, their OCD is more likely to be religiously oriented.”
While I have no evidence aside from the anecdotal variety that can be witnessed by anyone who has ever moderated an internet based Atheist group, I suspect that one of the behaviors those suffering from this psychosis engage in is online proselytizing to people of other religions to a degree that is obsessive, and that this element of Scrupulosity might be getting overlooked by researchers into the disorder.
How Scrupulosity Might Explain Obsessive Proselytizing by Non-Atheists in Atheist Online Communities
As a personal example, I frequently need to delete comments on Atheism Daily’s Facebook page from Christian apologetics who spam the page with the same proselytizing messages over and over again. There have been a few cases where it is clear the same individual is making new Facebook accounts to continue posting these messages, and our Facebook page for this website is by no means very popular, which makes the behavior all the more unusual. The impression I get from the spam is that the person responsible is not trying to engage in any real meaningful dialogue but is instead going through the motions of missionary work in order to appease their deity, and is probably doing this to lots of other pages they randomly find while searching on Facebook for things related to Atheism.
So what then could trigger this kind of obsessive posting? Cognitive science research that has been done, which I cited earlier, gives us an idea. Obsessions thrive on intolerance of uncertainty. Religious systems that teach eternal punishment, omnipresent surveillance and invisible thought-crimes supply limitless uncertainty triggers for those suffering from the anxiety disorder. A superstitious believer predisposed to OCD perceives minor lapses in their faith—such as an intrusive sexual thoughts or accidental profanity—as serious cosmic felonies. The compulsions then blossom: endless confession, repeated “perfect” prayer recitations, or frantic efforts to recruit allies from the Atheist community, because winning converts can supposedly earn spiritual credit with their deity. Yet to the Atheist unaware of their off-screen affliction, all that is seen is the facade of confident arrogance, while the Christian or Muslim apologetic sufferer of Scrupulosity actually experiences a raw panic in the real world fueled by imagined terrors.
While it is easy to ridicule those who cast the first stones at us by entering Atheist spaces to knowingly engage in unwanted proselytizing, I think it may be worthwhile for us Atheists to consider showing greater sympathy toward minds ensnared by superstition and consider that these people may be suffering from a little understood type of obsessive psychosis for which there are few resources for treatment. Yet our sympathy should not mean indulgence. You do the scrupulous no favor by applauding their obsessive terrors or by validating doctrines that sharpen the spikes inside their minds. I think help is better provided by recognizing the medical nature of their struggle, by offering links to mental health resources rather than ridicule. According to what literature is available, exposure and response prevention therapy and nuanced counselling all show meaningful results when sufferers receive competent care. A 2024 paper titled Psychotherapies for the treatment of scrupulosity: a systematic review concluded that cognitive-behavioral methods tailored to religious themes deliver significant relief. So the ailment is treatable.
Learning to Recognize Signs of Scrupulosity
What practical stance should the thoughtful Atheist adopt when the next zealous critic barges in?
First, look for signs of compulsion. Rapid repetition of words, compulsive quoting, fixation on eternal damnation or unforgivable sins often reveal Scrupulosity rather than simple rudeness. Even if these statements are directed at Atheists, these accusations of Atheism as a sin may be a form of projecting for the sufferer, which is a psychological defense mechanism where individuals unconsciously attribute their own unacceptable thoughts, feelings, or traits to others. It’s a common way for those suffering from a psychosis to cope with internal conflict and anxiety by externalizing those unwanted aspects of themselves and placing them onto someone or something else.
Second, redirect toward evidence-based help. Share links to secular mental-health clinics, the International OCD Foundation’s faith and OCD pages. Your calm provision of options plants a seed that no sarcastic meme or hurtful insult can match.
Third, refuse the bait of endless apologetics spirals. Set boundaries and make it clear that the problem is not with you and so lashing out at you cannot help the afflicted person resolve their psychosis. Statements such as, “I respect your concern, yet I will not debate salvation. If intrusive guilt troubles you, please consider professional support.” That kind of statement models both kindness and rational firmness.
Fourth, advocate for more research into this malady. Scrupulosity remains understudied compared to other kinds of OCD. We can assume that a funding bias against research is likely a cause for this, since mainstream psychology is often uncomfortable with the proposition of treating superstitious religious beliefs as a form of mental illness. Atheists should lobby secular charities and public agencies to expand research grants for examining religious-linked OCD. Such research serves Atheists too, because a better understanding of this psychosis and its mechanisms erodes the psychological fuel that keeps superstitious dogma aflame.
Moreover, strategic benefit aligns with moral duty. When an Atheist community responds to harassment with derision alone, the scrupulous attacker records the hostility as proof of demonic opposition, reinforcing the cycle. Yet when the community counters with measured information and visible empathy, it can introduce cognitive dissonance—the first crack in obsessive certainty. While many afflicted with Scrupulosity will likely double down on their delusions, there will be others who consider the information and search for treatment, just as many people with other kinds of OCD do once they are made aware that they may be suffering from something that is treatable. Ultimately, as Atheists should we not want to help others escape from the mental chains of religious tyranny that hold fast over the human mind, and try to help liberate our fellow humans from this imagined prison?
Of course, this argument demands intellectual honesty. Scrupulosity does not explain every act of religious aggression; opportunists, grifters and ideologues still roam free. Nor does mental illness absolve harmful behaviour from consequence. Civil law punishes threats regardless of motive, and online moderators must still protect their spaces. Compassion complements accountability; it never replaces it.
I am only inviting other Atheists to consider recalibrating our reflexes to unwanted online proselytizing. The next time you encounter a zealot accusing you of secret Satanism, take a pause. Ask whether you are observing a fellow human tormented by a pathological guilt. Consider offering a path toward evidence-based help while maintaining firm boundaries. If they refuse, disengage without spite. If they listen, you may very well have helped rescue a person from a psychosis thrust upon them from their childhood conditioning in a religious household, and, in the process, weaken the superstitious systems that rely on such psychosis to survive.
Scholarship, policy and personal conduct should converge on the same goal: illuminate Scrupulosity, treat it vigorously, and in so doing pull one of the psychological pillars out from under faith-based authoritarianism.