Many years ago I read a book named 'Adams vs God'.
It was the final push I needed to escape Christianity.
Reading the bible should be enough to untangle a programmed mind, you would think.
I read it from start to finish twice.
However, as a x-tian, if you're troubled by certain parts of the bible, you will talk about it with other x-tians who will either say something to convince you that you are wrong or start to ostracise you from the community you are part of.
So personally, I think atheist literature is extremely important for some people.
It can be the feather that broke the camel's back.

I never felt it was necessary to read atheists literature and I've been an atheist for years (even when I was attending various churches). At that time I wasn't aware of my real self, though even then, I felt there was something not quite right with any Protestant (sect?).

I'm not ashamed to admit that I have never read any atheist literature.

I read Sagan's Demon Haunted World. It about put me to sleep. I used to belong to several atheist book clubs, so I read quite a few books, but only a few of the classics. After my experience with Sagan, I'm a bit jaded toward reading "the classics".

(February 27, 2017 at 8:46 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Don't believe in transubstantiation? Then you're not 'real' Catholic.
Boru

Well that depends. When the rcc wants to enforce it's exclusive right to making dogma, then you're not a catlick if you don't believe in transubstantiation. But when they're trying to convince governments and other organisations that their religious beliefs should be law all that's needed to make one a real catlick is that a priest has thrown water over one's head at some stage.

(February 21, 2017 at 4:02 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:

(February 21, 2017 at 3:30 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: Born and raised Catholic, but with an atheist doctor Dad.

Guess which path I followed...

Was it...




That makes me chuckle every time I see it!

---

Apart from Dawkins, I've read books from Sam Harris, Hitchens, David Fitgerald, Richard Carrier and Rene Salm. As I have never been a Christian, I've been told by another atheist recently that I should read some Christian books to get their perspective, but I really can't stomach that. Has anyone any suggestions that would help understand what they actually believe, or am I better off just Googling?

(February 27, 2017 at 2:33 am)ComradeMeow Wrote:

(February 23, 2017 at 9:04 pm)Magilla Wrote: I don't understand how an atheist can also be a creationist, unless you have a highly unconventional definition of creationism, (ie. as an -ism).
In your religious views, you cite creationism :-

It simply means that I believe that man created gods and their qualities and not the other way around. It is just a way of me opening dialogue to people. Being a conservative and a right-winger I have to play mind games with my own "kind" to discuss religion.
.
.
.

Nothing brings joy to my heart than completely debasing a person's beliefs without stopping. 

OK, I get it - no problem.

(February 27, 2017 at 9:53 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: I read Sagan's Demon Haunted World.  It about put me to sleep.  I used to belong to several atheist book clubs, so I read quite a few books, but only a few of the classics.  After my experience with Sagan, I'm a bit jaded toward reading "the classics".

Demon haunted world was one of his last books written in 95 and it was written as a book on skepticism and not Atheism. I haven't read it but I did read Dragon's of Eden, Broca's Brain and Contact as well as Cosmos. Those books came out in the late 70's and I liked them all and have so much respect for Sagan's ability to bring science to non scientists and do it (usually) entertainingly.

(February 27, 2017 at 9:53 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: I read Sagan's Demon Haunted World.  It about put me to sleep.  I used to belong to several atheist book clubs, so I read quite a few books, but only a few of the classics.  After my experience with Sagan, I'm a bit jaded toward reading "the classics".

It's not really an atheism book, it's a book on skepticism.  There are plenty of them that are similar, that explain why the ideas they explore are nonsense.

Abusing Science by Philip Kitcher
Frauds, Myths and Mysteries by Kenneth L. Feder
Fads & Fallacies in the Name of Science by Martin Garner

They all explain why the pseudoscientific concepts they explore are idiotic and that's their value.