What are some good checkmate arguments against religion?

[Mister Agenda]

So, Francis Collins wasn't a 'true atheist'. This is ignoring the fact that his views of atheism are now coloured by his Christian beliefs.

I think it would be reasonable to doubt an atheist's claims of having been a devout Christian if they were unaware of what their own denomination teaches. 'You don't have to be able to prove God doesn't exist to not believe in God' is atheism 101. 'Staunch' seems much less likely than 'never gave it much thought'. When he finally did give it some thought, he became a Christian.

I've met 'ex-atheists' whose testimony that they were atheists consisted solely of accounts of frat boy behavior and poor church attendance. It's not their fault that their pastors lied to them about what atheism is, but that still doesn't mean they were atheists. If they can't handle a simple syllogism like 'I was an atheist because I didn't beleive in God', why should I trust their word on the matter? Heck, I've met ex-atheists who maintain that everyone knows in their hearts that God is real...which means they never really didn't believe in God: anyone who has actually been an atheist has actually had the experience of not believing in God.

Unless by 'coloured by Christian beliefs' you mean rewrite your own history to conform to Christian cliches, a goodly number of ex-atheists are simply mistaken. I would place Collins as a casual atheist in the same sense his parents were casual Christians. I think this is a reasonable conclusion given his background. Do you disagree?

A few minutes googling shows that he isn't the only atheist who converted to a religion. So, in my opinion, arguments about lack of education and indoctrination should be used with caution.

Although I agree with your conclusion, your argument is a non-sequitur. It does not follow from some atheists converting to religion that people who are religous do not lack education; unless you grant atheists some special status of always being educated and immune to indoctrination.

---

A few minutes googling shows that he isn't the only atheist who converted to a religion. So, in my opinion, arguments about lack of education and indoctrination should be used with caution.

Or rather, broad generalizations about that should be used with caution. Life is too nuanced to make sweeping blanket statements about all but the simplest of positions; exceptions to a rule don't necessarily invalidate the rule in a general sense.

That said, I do wonder why it is that so many of these "former atheist" stories we hear include such inaccurate portrayals of what atheism actually is. Sometimes it seems like every atheist-turned-christian we hear from was of the gnostic stripe, or rather, convinced themselves that they were after the fact to distance themselves from the more cogent atheist positions out there.

I know of two convincing converts with previous cred as atheists that I have no reasonable doubt of having actually been atheists. In both cases, they had an SO for whom religion was very important and knew they didn't have reasons for conversion that other atheists would find compelling.

I could convert: the right words from the right person and I'm back in the Pentecostal church putting in at least a year of trying to convince myself that the religion I was raised in is true. As a known atheist, I could be virtual rock star if I pulled it off, and they'd probably try to find me a pretty wife to seal the deal (I'd have been married thirty years ago if I'd stayed in the church). I could write a book about my journey that would sell well in fundamentalist circles. I'm not sure how I would break the part of my brain that understands the evidence for evolution, but I could keep my mouth shut about that. I wouldn't be able to articulate a cogent reason for my conversion, but I would still know why I was an atheist and what an atheist really is.