Theism and emotional attitudes to adversity

Here are two three possible emotional attitudes towards great adversity:
a. Judaeo-Christian: hope
b. Stoic: calm
c. Russellian: anger/despair.
Now consider this argument:
1. The appropriate attitude towards great adversity is Judaeo-Christian or Stoic.
2. If naturalism is true, the appropriate attitude towards great adversity is Russellian.
3. So, naturalism is false.
The reason for (1) is the obvious attractiveness of the hopeful-to-calm part of the emotional spectrum
as a way of dealing with diversity.
The reason for (2) is that emotions should fit with reality. But as Russell argues, a naturalist reality
does not care about us: we came from the nebula and we will go back to the nebula, and the darkness
of our life makes Greek tragedy the supreme form of human art. The most we can do shake our fist at
the injustice of it all.