The above, very sincerely intended, I’m sure, laundry list is very valid from our standpoint, but is far from true from the standpoint of many atheists. And I say that despite being quite aware that many atheists sort of prove a belief in a left handed way by, in some cases, expressing anger at an entity they claim has no existence. But those are not “true” atheists, I’d say.
True atheists, imo, are of two stripes. The first of these can be somewhat easily dismissed as they are those who, though they do not believe in the Christian portrayal of God, do believe or know God in another paradigm or claim direct knowledge through mysticism. Many of these are accused of everything from being atheists to subscribing, from our point of view, to some heresy or another.
Others, what I would call truly hard core atheists, are yet again of two stripes. They are those who quit their beliefs in a god due to some perceived failure on the part of deity or clerics, and those who by sheer weight of their own logic, or accepted logic of others, do not believe.
These last are very difficult to refute as they are entrenched in reason rather than in emotion, which though difficult to deal with may sometimes be assuaged. And the most adamant refusal they sport is that of a personal God who created a Universe objectively separate from “Himself.” In this they are in partial agreement with the non dualists.
But here is what I’m trying to get to: Given all the factors, one in particular, such lists as posted above will do nothing to sway or even cause an atheist of genuine conviction to even take notice. Such lists will even serve to entrench them further. And that one factor in particular is curious indeed, and ought be well noted by those of us of faith, however embarrassing it is. But even St. Thomas Aquinas warned about it to the faithful in an admonishment designed to keep them from looking silly.
It is this, and it would be wonderful to hear some ideas about this conglomerate idea from the faithful in terms of refutation: statistically atheists and agnostics are better versed in religion and notably more articulate about such ideas than are fundamentalist Christians who are at the opposite end of the scale in these matters, and Roman Catholics who are next. This statistic applies as well to intelligence in general, despite any particular examples to the contrary. Do your research and you will see, I’m sorry to say, that it is so.
Therefore I think it would behoove those of great faith, if they wish to do any convincing work with atheists who purport that religion is a scam, to perhaps not be so inbred as to solely be concerned with their own devotion to what is already their deep conviction and look comprehensively and competently at a broader picture. That might serve to give a more useful ground of conversation when confronted by such non believers than tautologies referent to our own beliefs.
