I have no issue with being called a "hard hearted atheist". Moreover, I make no apology for my ruthless application of reason and logic to "the God question". If people want to be so soggy brained as to claim the existence of their particular god in the complete absence of any supporting falsifiable evidence, then that is entirely their choice.

I find most atheists to be progressive, which means caring for the poor, environment, animal rights, So I completely disagree that most atheists are “hard hearted.” Most atheists tend to be progressive. If anything, it’s the evangelical Christians who tend to vote against services for the poor, environmental protections etc. Try the American humanist association, center for inquiry, , freedom from religion foundation,for community and ways to help.

I did not suddenly realize I was an atheist. Apostasy was a process. There was no atheist epiphany but, if anything, a series of some small realizations and new understandings reaching a rational conclusion.

The millions of cosmic coincidences that were necessary to allow the Earth and the universe to eventually develop seem like an impossible billion in one chance until we realize there are billions of planets and billions of years where everything that can happen probably will someday. Hence our existence.

I watched a Bill Maher 2005 stand up clip on YouTube about how he was able to drill out Catholicism like his dentist did the same for him with the old mercury in his system. After years of Skepticism about the church it was that moment that I officially lost my faith and became an atheist.

I was born and raised an atheist. In my teen angst and rebellion years I became even more strident. I softened in my 20s and 30s. I read the bible, the Koran, Buddhist texts. But I became more of an atheist after that than ever.
Now I am nauseated by religion. I only want scientific verifiable information.

So, no to answer the question. No real memory of any event as you describe, but my situation is somewhat different too from what you put forth.

I realised at age 6 or 7 that my Sunday school teacher was making stuff up. Since then I've never had the least religious feeling. It's like horoscopy - once you see it's a contrivance you no longer have the least interest in it and it's irrelevant to your life except as some local colour as to how self-deceiving people can be.

I became aware of the conflict between evolution and western religion early on. When I was young, I was particularly struck by the precise correspondence between the leg bones of my dog compared to my own leg. The religionist claim that humans were not animals just didn't jibe.

In college, the biology class used a chart that showed the number of amino acid differences in Cytochrome C from various species and how the number of those differences closely matched the distances in the evolutionary tree branches. Perfect evidence of imperfection, and epiphany.

Wonderfully, that was just the start. Evolution is science's Old Testament, and physics is the New Testament. And this time, they don't contradict each other.

I was raised in a family who self identified as freethinkers, the word atheist was never used, but that in effect was what we were. I was taught to read everything, ask questions and formulate my own views and opinions on religion. I was also taught to respect other people’s points of view even if I did not agree with them, so I’m happy to allow others to believe in god and creationism, although I myself reject that idea based on lack of any credible evidence to support such a belief, and much evidence and the laws of probability against. I do believe much the same as you have outlined, and of course we are still searching for all the pieces of the jig-saw puzzle that is the cosmos and how we fit into it.

A person can use the cosmos to claim everything was made just right for us and try to claim a creator. These days I use things like my shoes. Animals do not have shoes and I have them, so they must have been made just for me. Once I understand how others all have different shoes with different sizes and all, I might have to change that idea into "many shoes." This would mean to me that a person using the "made for us" idea to explain a god should start believing in "many gods."

Survival of the fittest explains it all on our planet. DNA, germs, us, other animals, etc. We cannot explain the universe. Beyond that we have evidence that the bible as we know it came into being some 300 years after Jesus. I put this together with the knowledge that we do not know everything and also cannot know everything. I cannot tell you how it all began.

When I got to college I was forced to use critical reason whenever I read anything, since I went to a catholic university they had a course on theologies, so I was given the task to read all the religious books from all major religions, once I read them I realized that all of them were so full of nonsense, illogical and totally unscientific crap that it became obvious all religions were bullshit. So it was right then and there. I actually got an A in my paper, this was back in 1970, which basically described all the incongruent crap I found in all religious books, the point I defended successfully was nothing this stupid can be worthy to blindly follow.

I have never been a Christian, but I became actively anti-Christian when I was 11. Growing up in SLC as a non-Mormon will do that to you.

I left the church I grew up in in the early 80s but it took over 10 years to transition through spiritual but not religious to agnosticism to finally feel comfortable calling myself atheist. That came through reading "The God Delusion."

It was a process for me, and one that was driven - ironically - by well-meaning but aggressive christian theists trying to “save” me. It began when I was around nine or so, when my college-age sister mentioned how a culture’s ideas about the gods seemed to reflect their social and political structures — an idea that stuck with me and that has a lot of evidence behind it. Around the same time, I started exploring philosophy and politics, especially thinking outside of the Western christian worldview.

By the time I was a high-schooler, I was a confirmed sceptic and agnostic. This was in the 1970s, when a conservative reaction to the cultural experimentation of the ‘60s set in: the populist, so-called “Jesus movement” with its army of “Jesus freaks” earnestly evangelizing in public and private spaces.

I soon had several very nice, very insistent friends and acquaintances trying to convert me. I had no problem engaging with them in dialogues, especially the smart ones, and actually began to enjoy questioning their assumptions and refuting their arguments. The better their arguments, the better I got at it, and the sharper my focus and stronger my positions became.

In college, two things happened: I developed a love for anthropology, and began to see religious/spiritual ideas as mythology, serving mythological functions for a society, and; I realized that the old ideas about gods simply didn’t make any real-world sense to me, and that there was no evidence for them intellectually or intuitively. I had no more room for a belief in them in the world I inhabited: their “services were no longer required!” I had become an full-fledged atheist, because the claim that gods literally exist has no credibility with me because it makes no sense to me.

For me, it was a gradual and logical process since very young. I was born in Spain during Gen.Franco’s dictatorship, to a middle class family in which religion was never an issue. Catholicism was the state religion and most people went (and still do) through the motions and rituals -some believing, others not- as a social event and because it was the thing to do. My parents never were regular churchgoers, so I went with my Grandma. My father was a modern Renaissance Man, interested in very many subjects and both my sister and I soaked the knowledge that arrived every month in the form of books and specialty magazines (Science, Arts, History, Archaeology...).
I vividly remember one episode that took place at school when I was 9. I approached my 4th grade room teacher, a nun, and asked her why the head and neck of primitive people looked quite like those of a chimpanzee while the pictures of Adam and Eve showed them looking like us. She asked where I’d seen that and I replied ‘In my Dad’s magazines and books’. I don’t remember what else she said, but I returned to my desk feeling very displeased with her answer.
It all went down from there and I stopped going to church by the age of 15. I could not bear the concept of ‘blind faith’ as opposed to using logic/reason, as well as the lot of contradictions between what I was hearing during Mass and religion classes and what I was finding out on my own, so it was a very natural catharsis for me and I’m totally at peace with it.
I was never taught or had the feeling that the Earth and everything on it was made for us. I first heard that concept when I came to the U.S. and consider it to be utterly obscene, just a way to justify the catastrophic exploitation of natural resources and the complete disregard for our environment and all creatures that live in it.
These days I consider myself an agnostic. I can’t believe in organized religion nor in some invisible but ever-present, omnipotent celestial being ruling the Universe. But I do hope there is something else -anything- on the ‘other side’.

Becoming an atheist for me was traumatic. I was angry and sad. It it was all because I decided to really devote my time to God and read the Bible. And the first thing my pastor told me when she saw that I was a deep thinker was: lean not on your own understanding. I find that kind of manipulating on her part now.

Becoming an atheist for me was a side effect of breaking away from Mormonism.
I knew I was no longer LDS, and within days I realised the very arguments that had lead me out of the cult applied equally to religion as a whole, and that being the case I knew I was atheist, no question or doubt, I was simply incapable of believing that terrifying shit any more.

I knew I was an atheist for years but would not admit it. Atheist were the haters that Fox news talked about. (I don't watch fox news now). Even when I knew it for years I could not say it aloud.

I’m not converted as I was never a real believer but I do remember when I went from just not believing to being sure there wasn’t a god. Kinda what you’re talking about? For me it was an afternoon on YouTube.
I don’t recall exactly why but I was interested that day on the “real” arguments believers had. Not just the weird things I’d heard everyday Christians say. (I’ve only really had direct conversations about the subject with Christians). So looked around and and with each passing video I began to realize there were no REAL arguments. Every video was a nutter ignorant of a logical path to knowledge. Most were so outlandishly foolish I actually could not tell the difference between them and the other videos mocking them.
Aside from the derisive sarcastic videos the pro atheist ones on the other hand had sound logic almost exclusively. The atheist speakers also had a quality that I can’t quantify. They just spoke intelligently. I mean they “sounded” like intelligent people where as many of the pro god speakers sounded of below average intelligence to me.
That afternoon really flabbergasted me. I just couldn’t believe that the other side didn’t have any real reasons to believe. I guess I had always assumed they had some kind of evidence. I mean they must to create whole societies around it. For people to fashion their entire lives around it there musta been some good reasoning. I understand about indoctrination now but didn’t realize it’s power at that time.

That afternoon turned me from an apathetic non believer to a reverent atheist.

I was not raised in any religion as such, and grew up in a mainly secular home. My family were not anti-theist in any way, they just did not bother with it. So that as a child I grew up with the naive idea that since religious people professed a good ideology, they must be good people. I therefore experienced a great shock when I went to second school, (many schools in the UK are religiously founded ) and discovered that some of them were truly horrible people believing crazy stuff, the shock of that has never left me.

Life is a lottery & no thing is permanent.

I have never been anything but an atheist.

NOTE This is my personal view, it is shared by many but I don't wish to speak for all who call themselves atheists. Atheism is not dogmatic, there is no worship & it is not a religion. We simply reject the claim that a god exists. We are not claiming a god can't exist, only that there is not good evidence in support of one. END NOTE

Atheism is the most misunderstood viewpoint on the planet. The basic concept of atheism is as follows:

A religious person makes a claim, "I am 'religion of choice' and I believe in this 'deity of choice.'"

The atheist's response to this is as follows:

"What reason has led you to believe this?"

Many reasons are always given but the problem is that they are never grounded in demonstrable facts, the only thing ever given is anecdotal assertions of the relevance of "holy books" such as the "Bible" for example. Unfortunately, these are not evidence of the beliefs asserted, they are further assertions that beg further questions and raise bigger questions rather than provide answers.

One might ask, "Well how do you know there is no god?"

That's a great, but misguided question, firstly this question is fallacious falling victim to the "straw-man" argument. In other words, it is a misrepresentation of the opposing view whether by improper understanding or purposeful misrepresentation. Atheists aren't making any claims about a god specifically existing or not. To explain this point further one must understand the difference between knowledge & belief.

"Gnostic" is the Latin word for knowledge.

"Theism" is the Latin word for belief.

The prefix "a" is the negation of whatever it precedes (ex. atheist)

With understanding this you must also understand, none of this has any inherent connection with religion. The religious context is just the most common association.

Now in the context of a deity, for example, the Christian "God" there is no evidence that anyone has any true knowledge of "God" or any other so by default everyone is agnostic by definition. The difference now comes in with belief, either you are a theist and believe or an atheist and don't believe. Therefore there are only two categories:

Agnostic Theists or Agnostic Atheists

Now as said before, atheists are not making a claim they are rejecting many claims. Many religions claim that their deity is in existence and the atheist's position is very simple & straightforward, "What reason is there to believe that this deity exists?"

The reason why it is fallacious to ask an atheist why there is no god is that they never made the claim there isn't, they only denied the claim that there is a god because they don't have sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim.

It all comes down to what is known as the "burden of proof" which is simply this:

If one makes a claim, one must provide evidence to substantiate the claim.

This is why asking an atheist to prove there is no god is like if you were asked to prove there is no Allah or Buddha or fairies, pixies or goblins, evidence has to be given by the one asserting any of these are real, otherwise what is the motivation for belief?

Religions like to believe their particular view is absolutely correct and not open to criticism. Something that is overlooked is that they can be considered an atheist with respect to every religion except for the one they believe. Atheists just take it, one god, further.

The problem with the concept of faith is as follows:

All religions are based on it but can't account for how their faith is superior to the other. There is a reason for this:

Faith is the excuse one gives when they don't have a good reason for what they believe if one truly had good reasons for what they believe they wouldn't need faith, so what good is faith then?

And this becomes a recurring theme amongst all religions, they typically try to promote some form of anecdotal testimony through their chosen holy book but that itself can't be evidence if the god assumed responsible for the book's existence is in question, to begin with. It's circular logic which is again fallacious.

Most atheists due to their study of philosophy & science are better versed in understanding more fundamental & complex concepts on which reality is based on, which leads to better understanding of the universe and its properties through years of dedicated interest, study & effort to obtain knowledge. It is very ignorant to simply look at the sky, mountains & life and blindly assume that it only could come into existence from a god.

It demonstrates your ignorance to the mountains of verified empirical evidence to the contrary to what you believe. Atheism is based on being skeptical of claims until evidence is presented but being open enough to research and consider claims without automatically dismissing them.

In general, atheists are skeptical individuals who are persuaded by evidence & reason. They are not bad people, in fact, the contrary is evident based on data from polls taken of secular nation versus religious. The correlation is absolutely on one side, societal health & happiness is always higher in secular nations versus religious. A large proposed reason for this is that religions are based on dogmatic assertions of what is to believe to be true & how to act which is why things such as death penalties, anti-gay movements & racism exist in religious countries.

A major reason I personally find the atheist viewpoint to be far more moral is that for a large number of religious individuals, their motivations for acting in moral ways are based on a desire for the reward of a heaven, a fear of a hell or both. For an atheist, we don't see a reason to believe in either and act as morally as we can because we genuinely want to and think it's the right thing to do. Also, another motivation for atheists is that working together is more productive than against each other.

Hopefully based on this you are more enlightened on the viewpoint of the atheist and understand the view whether or not you agree or perhaps this explanation has led you to consider a change in view. Either way thanks for reading!

I identify most exactly as an agnostic-atheist, but comfortably answer to either part. Therefore I wouldn't consider myself "hard-hearted." That sounds too much like "uncaring," which the humanist in me certainly is not.

Having said that, my escape from my evangelical religious indoctrination really happened in three stages, and I have seminal memories in each that were "Aha" moments.

I first abandoned church as having any legitimacy as a moral guide. As a mere 16 year old, I listened to the head pastor at the pulpet express his disdain for women working traditionally masculine jobs, like construction, and in the next breath ridiculing men with long hair. What a prick! He would have looked down his nose at Jesus. I suddenly saw hypocrisy written all over self-appointed religious leaders and churches in general. I knew that same sexist thinking in the church membership appointed that mysogynist as head pastor. He was so arrogant.

Second, sitting in religion class in Germany, age 17, my exchange student year, hearing the teacher shred the Bible by pointing out numerous factual errors and contradictions within it. Yeah! Not exactly American Sunday School. Right there my last thread of trust in the Bible as inerrant was severed. I saw it to be the semi-literate, primative sheepherder cultural hodgepodge collection of creative writing exercise that it was. ...and not even very original in its ideas.

Finally, in college, home for summer break, age 19, talking with the pastor's wife where my parents were attending, this pleasant lady was asking me about college. When I told her I was attending Tulane, she warned me of the insidious danger of secular universities, specifically that secular academic thinking sounds so reasonable, and that this is how it slips in between us and our faith and can create a wedge leading to wavering. I said nothing but remember thinking very emphatically that she had just driven the nail the the coffin of what was left of my evaporating faith. Imagine: a faith so fragile that it cannot even withstand exposure to common sense and reason. Education as a threat. It was back to the Garden of Eden story of villifying a desire for knowledge as enemy of God? What kind of god makes us with brains and then forbids us from using them? What a sadist god that must be!

Great post. Thanks for sharing! I'm not sure when I flipped over. It was gradual.

Why I Am an Atheist

Since age 13, I have been an atheist. I realized the Bible is just a book of stories or fables like Grimm's Fairy Tales.

Beginning at five when I had to go to Sunday school, I scoffed at ridiculous Bible stories: Jesus rose from the dead, a woman turned into stone, parting of the Red Sea, Noah's Ark, etc.

Michigan had a hard winter when I was 13. Bored and restless, my brother Lee, 10, and I read the World Book Encyclopedias together.

I was inspired by rational philosophers Spinoza and Descartes. They were bravely anti-theist (anti-gods), anti-church and anti-clergy in the 1600s when heretics were burned at the stake. They had to go into hiding.

The writings of rational philosophers Spinoza and Descartes inspired the European Enlightenment. The Enlightenment Period of the 17th and 18th centuries emphasized science and reason over faith and superstition.