It seems that most of those responding here do so from the heart.

Poppycock. the heart is nothing more than a pump.

If you're suggesting that the responses here are the product of emotion rather than reason, then state that, instead of waffling. Then we can point to numerous instances in which scientific papers were brought here to refute mythology fanboy assertions. At which point, we're dealing with reason, not emotion. Bye bye to the first of your assertions.

And not from their intellect.

What about those of us who brought scientific papers here, to establish the case in question? Oh, you don't have an answer to that, do you?

Or at least the heart misguides the intellect.

You just summed up mythology fanboyism.

They have some deep personal abhorrence to religion, seemingly to Christianity as a whole

What part of "we have a large body of observational data, pointing to the malign influence of mythology fanboyism" do you not understand?

Everything from the attempts by creationists to corrupt and pervert science education, through the stifling of medical research for spurious reasons, to the attempts to warp the operation of civil society itself to conform to mythological fantasy. Oh, and the current Coronavirus episode is providing us with much dark humour with respect to mythology fanboy responses thereto.

and they refuse to look at the evidence and remember what the Bible says about God

Your mythology doesn't contain evidence, it contains blind assertions. Lots of them. But I'm now tiresomely familiar with the inability of mythology fanboys to distinguish correctly between the two.

in favor for what their fellow humans have done that is wrong.

Except that if the assertions of your mythology were something other than the product of the rectal passages of pre-scientific goat herders, then we would observe entirely different behaviour on the part of mythology fanboys like you. Indeed, if the assertions of your mythology were something other than made up shit, science as we know it would be impossible. I'll let you ponder a little on why this is the case, and see if you're capable of deducing the requisite conclusion from first principles.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would reject the hand of someone who is so unselfish and loving as the Bible has portrayed to be.

Actually, several of us here are on record as wishing mythology fanboys behaved more like your magic man (at least, in the NT incarnation - to quote Lewis Black, the OT version was a prick).

They only think that what the Bible says, is a lie. It can't be true. Why is this? Because man can't be trusted. And since man to them is the one that wrote the Bible, God must be a made up mythical being, who is in the work of hurting and killing them.

Ahem, put down the mythology goggles for a moment, and look at the real world as it actually is.

If you were presented with any other body of text, that contained demonstrably wrong and absurd assertions about the universe and its contents, assertions that have repeatedly been falsified by honest, diligent scientific inquiry, would you accept that text as a reliable source of knowledge? Of course you wouldn't. So why do you treat a goat herder mythology containing risible errors as some fantastic gift from an invisible magic man?

Here's a clue for you. Any entity GENUINELY responsible for fabricating a universe and its contents, one moreover asserted to be intent upon presenting a "message" to us humans, would subject any text attributed to it, to ruthless proofreading, to weed out errors of the sort that litter your mythology. Even more so, in the light of the assertion that said entity purportedly possesses "perfect foreknowledge" of the future, and as a corollary of that assertion, would know in advance that said errors would be alighted upon by humans, and regarded as bringing the provenance of the requisite mythology into question.

Indeed, why would a fantastically gifted magic entity of this sort, even bother with mythology at all, as a vehicle for its purported "message", given the manifest unreliability of mythology as an informative medium?

You have no answer to any of this.

Apollo "ndromeda,
Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, and Einstein were all theists of various sorts. "

During eras when everyone was a theist you mean, that's insanely funny.

Apollo So theist scientists were responsible for much of the change in science. Seems to be a dearth of atheists among the greats of science.

All modern hydraulic suspension, alloy wheels, and pneumatic radial tyres were derived from solid wooden wheels and axles, so your imbecilic rationale implies the former is now dead as the latter is superior. I've said it before, and I will say it again, you are funny.

Apollo "I'm quite skeptical of the view that theists don't change, .......If an atheist didn't change for his whole life, that is remained an atheist,"

Now that is fucking hilarious, theists can remain theists and according to you are capable of change, but limiting atheists to just their lack of belief in one unevidenced superstition represents no capacity for change unless they become theists, it's so dishonest I want to object, but it's so hilariously stupid I'm too busy laughing.

Kudos, as I have to assume you were being ironic...

Edited...clarity and typos

@C: Thanks for that letter. You may see it again as it is mine now. I saved it and put it with my religious stuff on my desktop. Can't count the number of times I have heard Christians cite Einstein as a deist. I have seen short quotes before but never this letter. GREAT! Thanks for your time and effort!

@Fievel

"Should have said yes, they are afraid."

I'm sure that's true for many.

For many it's a case or purblind wilful ignorance, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias, or any combination.

@lion

You've become a poe. I read what seems like satire and it turns out you seem to be sincere.

"But eventually belief in God becomes permanent."

I guess that doesn't include the millions of people who found themselves no longer able to believe the exaggerated promises, false claims and bald faced lies of organised religion----- starting with most of our members..

Religious beliefs are purely an accident of birth for most people. Had you been born in Saudi Arabia, I have no doubt you would be a devout Wahabbi Muslim .

Religious belief is about faith, not reason or facts. Most of us absorb our religious views and zeitgeist uncritically, before the age of 7. It is my opinion that most people rarely of ever question their basic beliefs about religion or the world generally. Such beliefs tend to be' permanent'' as in lasting a lifetime .Imo trying to change such beliefs threatens a person's sense of identity, so the reaction can be extreme. .

As is shown here daily, [mainly by our resident apologists] firmly held beliefs are incredibly hard to dislodge, no matter how absurd or odious to reason. However, the same can be said for most strongly held positions. Nothing to do with god, and everything to do with the psychological aspects of such beliefs; cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias and of course wilful ignorance.

Atheists are a relatively small minority of world population. I think that shows that religious beliefs tend to be life long.

"IF you could reason with religious people there wouldn't be any" (Greg House)

" Beware of the true believe; at best naive, at worst, dangerous" (Tarquin St John Shagnasty)

@Lion IRC

First who are you talking to?

And second.

I will never go back to Christianity, as all the stories can in fact be debunked.

@Whitefire Re: "Thank god for Satan’s world...I’m safe here."

That's right girlfriend! We've got your back!... *Z-snap*...

(By the way, that link you posted was some of the most convoluted double-speak word salad I have seen in awhile.... *shaking head in amazement*...)