Are all atheists this ill-informed about religion?

[Delicate]

Yes. A lot of atheists here seem to have it.

How old are you? 12?

Yes

Yes. A lot of atheists here seem to have it.

An absence of belief in a skydaddy has nothing to do with the effect. Arrogance correlates strongly with theists who "know" there is a god though.

Good, because I don't believe very many people believe in a skydaddy.

You know, the only time I ever feel "atheist rage" is when someone keeps telling me that I'm angry because I'm an atheist.

Otherwise, I'm just fine. 

I am a former member of your religious club, of a highly-literalist/fundamentalist stripe, and only gave up my faith after much research and reflection. I enjoyed my time in the church; they were wonderful people, and wonderful to me. I have many fond memories, especially of the summer evangelism retreats (camps) and the All-State Baptist Youth Choir trips I got to make as a teenager. 

When I got involved with a local atheism group, in my mid-20s, I had such fond memories of our covered-dish suppers (most people say "pot-luck dinners") that I reinstituted the practice for our group explicitly because I thought it was a great way to socialize and to "multiply food" at our events, the way I had done in my church. Those in my church used to joke that covered-dish suppers were "The Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes, every Sunday afternoon!"

I considered the issues of core belief and doctrine, particularly that of literalism (in light of conflicts I had noticed between what was being taught from the pulpit as "Biblical Truth" and what I already knew about the natural world) and the inerrancy of scripture. You may not consider those to be core doctrines, but I assure you the evangelicals do! I have read volumes of works in apologetics and counter-apologetics, in addition to my own degree in biology (minors in chemistry and history), which of course I attained long after doing the initial research on theology. For you to sit here and arrogantly suggest that we are only non-Christian because we either don't understand Christianity or because we are angry at God/Christians/religion-in-general, even while we sit here telling you that you are mistaken, is to declare to us that you will never respect us, and are not worth the time and effort to treat seriously on matters which would be high-intensity in thought-process and research necessary to have an exchange on that level.

So enough hiding behind your rhetoric. List YOUR ideas about what constitutes "core doctrine", and the proofs of Christianity that you think we cannot escape logically, and let's get to it.

We all know it's the reason you're here, and the reason you're insulting our intelligence and integrity. We know bait when we see it. Well, you got it, our full attention.

Present your case or STFU.

Thanks for the background. I can't help but notice you have confused your fundamentalist background to be all of Christianity, and likewise confused your rejection of fundamentalism with your rejection of Christianity.

I had much the same background, but I was able to recognize that the existence of bad science doesn't discredit all of science, just like bad religion doesn't discredit all of religion.

As someone who took a step away from religion, analyzed it rationally, found it rational and decided to follow the evidence back to theism and Christianity, I'm skeptical that your study of theology was substantive. But that's a topic we can explore elsewhere.

That being said, you've raised some questions about my approach. Apparently I only believe atheists become atheists because they don't understand Christianity or because they are angry at God. And that's a problem.

I want to humbly suggest that the evidence based on posts I've seen suggest just that. Very few of the posts I've seen here so far contain a rational basis for rejecting religion. Where they do, they are inept or incomplete. 

You can verify this yourself, by scrolling through this very thread. Please look at the individual responses to my OP, and score them on two measures: Substantive rational content on one hand, and emotional rhetoric/ad hominem or content suggesting anger/hate/contempt/uncharitable attacks on the other.

Based on your findings, tell me what you would conclude.