On the surface, atheism is simply the lack of belief in any god or gods. For some people, this amounts to an utter lack of interest in the matter of the existence of gods. For other people, typically termed "strong" atheists, it means actively denying theism. I am of the opinion that people are born atheists. At birth, we have no knowledge or belief in a god or gods. Some atheists, people with the lack of a belief in a god or gods, label themselves under different headings. Some people whom I would label atheist, label themselves as agnostic. Some of these individuals say they cannot KNOW if there is a god or not, and so do not move themselves fully into the realm of atheism. I once called myself an agnostic, because I don't KNOW if there is a god or not. But I don't BELIEVE that there is, and so I realize I should be calling myself an atheist. I have heard of individuals labeling themselves as agnostic atheists, atheists who do not know if there is a god or not. No one truly KNOWS if god exists, hence the controversy. We cannot have absolute knowledge, however it is unreasonable to be agnostic about every topic. We can naturally assume that there is not a teapot floating in orbit around the earth.

This is a great link for those who want to look into this subject more closely: http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blath_index.htm.

So if you're confused, we've established that an atheist has no belief in any god or gods.

What is a rational atheist??

But what makes a rational atheist??? Just like not every theist is neccessarily irrational, not every atheist is rational. A rational atheist has no belief in the supernatural. No belief in magic. No belief in boogga boogga. We do not believe that Dick Cheney is a shape-shifting space-lizard. We do not believe in psuedo-science. We DO believe in science, in factual evidence and the laws of the natural world. We believe in evolution, that the earth is 4.5 billion years old, give or take, and that the universe did not need a creator.

Not all atheists ARE rational. You will meet some atheists who believe in the supernatural realm. "Atheist" itself is a very loose term, at it's simplest meaning "without belief in god or gods." With that definition then we can also call most Satanists, Buddhists and Taoists atheists. "Rational Atheist" is simply a more specific term signifying a person who a) does not believe in a god and b) does not believe in the supernatural and c) does not believe in a god because of the lack of evidence for one. A rational atheist is not just skeptical about the belief in a god or gods, but skeptical by nature.

Is a rational atheist close-minded?

Many people claim that rational atheists are dogmatic in their beliefs in science and the natural world. They claim that because of this dogmatic viewpoint, rational atheists are close-minded. However, this is a false preconception. Rational atheists rely on the current knowledge and empirical evidence of science and the natural world. If empirical evidence showing the existence of god, magic, or anything of a supernatural nature were to present itself to the rational atheist, then they would be able to accept a theistic outlook on life. The fact of the matter is, none of this evidence is in existence, which is exactly why the rational atheist does not believe in it. A rational atheist believes in the facts, the truth, and the evidence above all else.

How do you become a rational atheist?

The very first thing you want to do is work on changing the way you think. As humans, we are typically born with the innate desire to follow the actions of our elders. We believe what they tell us to be true, we follow their teachings, we learn their systems of belief. For many people, this tendency to follow the direction of others follows them throughout their lives. So the first step to becoming a rational atheist is to learn how to think more skeptically. DON'T believe everything you read. DON'T believe everything your parents, teachers, politicians, preachers, and peers tell you. Take everything with a grain of salt, research it and then get back to me. Accept NOTHING at face value. The opinions and beliefs that we form do so after exposure to many different angles of various situations.

You notice that I didn't mention having a lack of belief in a god as the first step on the path to rational atheism. Once you learn how to look at life as a skeptic, the lack of belief in god will come naturally.

Once you have become a skeptical, rational atheist you will find yourself in debate after debate. Usually with theists, but sometimes with others who are closer to your system of disbelief. While you enjoy your forage into the new world of atheism and theological debate, there are some irrational arguments that you should stay away from. We'll also show you some that are just about irrefutable according to modern day science.

Arguments for Atheism

First and foremost, any argument from The God Delusion or any book by Richard Dawkins. Read any of the following books and use the knowledge to form your own opinions: The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason by Sam Harris, Godless Morality: Keeping Religion Out of Ethics, Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism, Science and Religion: Are They Compatible?, Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person's Answer to Christian Fundamentalism, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan, Godless in America: conversations with an atheist, Atheism: The Case Against God and The Science of Good and Evil: Why People Cheat, Gossip, Care, Share, and Follow the Golden Rule by Michael Shermer. Find more books here.

Arguments at Godisimaginary.com. Some people find the work of Marhsall Brain, the man behind Godisimaginary.com, to be naive. We happen to think he's brilliant.

Anything from the Talk Origins Web site. They have a plethora of material on the evolution vs. creationism debate.

Our comments:

Disbelief should be the DEFAULT belief because there is no physical, natural, or scientific evidence for a god or anything supernatural. Evidence should be something that is observable and testable. Studies have tested prayer - it doesn't work. We have observed our natural world and not found any evidence for the existence of anything supernatural.

When I say God doesn't exist, I'm not really making a positive claim, I'm acknowledging the lack of evidence for God. If I were to say that Leprechauns, Unicorns, or zombies do not exist, you would not expect of me to explain why I thought that and provide evidence for such a "positive claim" or be an authority on such matters. I cannot be an authority on something that does not exist. Once again, if scientific proof were to become available showing the existence of God, I would change my stand on the issue and become a believer. I would however NOT worship the Christian God. I would still believe in him, but he would have to send me to hell. He is a despicable God.

The disbelief in God shouldn't be considered a CONCLUSION, it should be what you start with.

As far as a general overview, consider this...science is the best description
of our natural world. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to
point to any kind of supernatural existence. Regardless of the many
pseudoscience programs and movies, none of these things are
REAL. They are all for entertainment value only. So, for our purposes,
all evidence points in our favor. We know the truth.

Arguments that a rational atheist should NOT use

Seen the video The Naked Truth? It starts off okay, comparing the mythology of the Christian God to the mythology of previous Gods. It takes a while, but it eventually gets to the point - that the real God and religion we should all be following is that of astrology. Stay away from these people. There are certainly similarities that you can draw between past religions and current ones, but to decide that it's because we should all be reading our horoscopes, is ridiculous.

The supposed nonsense by Acharya S. It seems that the book by Acharya S. has both supporters and opponents. The owners of RationalAtheist.com have not read the book yet, but leave this here as a suggested resource of what NOT to use. As a note, Acharya S. does not suggest that she herself is an atheist.

Without getting into any of the above, it is easy just to stick to the following:

We have to judge the existence of God by natural laws, by what we experience, by what we know to be true. By what we can observe. If there were a god, it would only make sense that he would have evolved himself. Of course, there is a Christian philosophy that says the Christian God has changed and is changing.

We say, the Christian God is changing because the human race is changing, and we are the ones who invent the Gods.

The fact that there are over 60,000 CHRISTIAN denominations and so many more Gods that have and are being worshiped, and even many more ways of interpreting the Bible, how can only ONE of them be correct? And not ALL of them can be true. Since there is so much to choose from, we must choose the default belief of ­ 0 ­ none of them are true, God does not exist.

Comment: There is some current skepticism among atheists as to the validity of the life of Jesus Christ. Did he really exist? The owners of this site have not found any reason to believe that he didn't exist and find that furthermore, his existence is really not that important. The main point is this: there is no evidence for a God or supernatural entity.

Contributors so far to this page: Star and The Carl Sagan Fan Club

Additions will be made to this page. Have a suggestion or anything you want to add? Email us.