If I were an Atheist

[The Reality Salesman01]

First I would have to come to grips with the fact that in spite of a decline in religious attendance and participation atheism isn't a growing movement.

Cite your evidence please.

It's not just an issue of popularity. There are many unpopular beliefs and facts

Agreed. So, why did you feel the need to make a baseless assertion about it?

.Many popular beliefs have been abandoned do to evidence against them.

I'm not sure that you considered all the variables that make this an explanation for the disparity in numbers between Atheists/Theists that you referred to in the beginning. If it were true that there was an overwhelming number of religious people compared to Atheists, and it is true that popular ideas can be abandoned due to the evidence against them, it must also be true that for any popular belief that is abandoned due to contrary evidence, some understanding of not only the belief itself, but also what it means to critically examine the evidence and an aptitude for drawing rational conclusions from it. And if the ability and knowledge are required but also rare, then you could have a popular belief that is abandoned by the minority who possess the skills, while widely accepted by those who do not. If it the data concluded that of all people in the world, a small minority of them possess more knowledge about the doctrines and basic tenets of religion, and that minority of people also to possess a rare aptitude for critically examining information and drawing accurate conclusions from it, we would have singled out a minority of people without even identifying whether or not they were religious. If we then polled all of the people in that study to see which ones were religious, and it turned out that there was a correlation between Atheism and those who excelled in the two categories above, we would have a pretty good explanation for the disparity among Atheists and Religious people. It would be clear that some people possess a rare aptitude for critical inquiry, and you could infer that Atheism might just be a byproduct of what happens when those skills are applied to religious claims. The disparity would make sense, and it wouldn't point to religious belief being any more valid.

Considering many atheists equate belief in God with belief in Santa Claus how is it they're not gaining any traction? If the existence of God were as implausible as the existence of Santa Claus then there should be as many atheists as those who don't believe in Santa Claus.

This demonstrates a misunderstanding of not only the purpose of the comparison, but the kinds of conclusions that this comparison could support. First of all, Atheists use this to illustrate an unflasifiable hypothesis, and the burden of proof. All too often, when Theists are pressed to explain how they know god is real, rather make an argument to establish it, they make the mistake of asserting that if something can't be disproved, then it must be equally as possible as anything else. This is when Santa or another ridiculous idea can be useful in illustrating the fallacy they've just employed in place of reason. Obviously, most adults don't believe in Santa Claus, but what we are hoping Theists will realize is that nobody needs to disprove Santa Clause before it's justified to not believe in him. We are hoping that you think more about why that is, rather than allow yourself to be reflexively offended. To a Christian, I don't use Santa, I use Allah. From a doctrinal standpoint, Allah is a mutually exclusive and incompatible God to the Christian God, and there are millions of people who believe in it. Can Christians prove that Allah does not exist? No. But, they don't believe in him, why? If they would spend more time reflecting on how they answer the question instead of what they think the answer is, these sorts of thought experiments would be a lot more productive. But alas.

If atheists know something that leads them to conclude belief in God is equivalent to belief in Santa they are keeping it a well-guarded secret .

It's not that a belief in God is equivalent to a belief in Santa. But the same tools of thought are required to reason them away. As children, our parents, friends, and teachers molded our epistemology. If something was true, popularity determined what that was. If I thought that Santa wasn't real, mom could confirm it for me when she thought I was old enough. What we're trying to convey to you is that mom isn't here to tell you what's true anymore. The world may have decided for you that Santa isn't real, and the number of people who agree with you may give you confidence in your decision, but that doesn't get you out of the woods when it comes to claims about God. They're a dime a dozen, and we hear them all the time. I think you've mistaken this for a dilemma. It's not Atheists Vs. Christians. It's Atheists Vs. All the religions, and it Christians Vs. All the other religions. How do you know what you're saying about a God is true? That's our question. If you try to shift the burden of proof, get ready for a counter example. Rather than get mad, try thinking.

The question is what are atheists doing wrong? Why aren't they expressing their viewpoint in a way that actually persuades people?

I was a Theist. I was persuaded by an Atheist. I found later that my initial negative reaction to what they were saying was because I was not prepared to grapple with the things they were saying. I chose feeling defensive because I felt that I was under attack. Later, I understood that the way I perceived their words was a "me problem".

I suspect some atheists enjoy being contrary and being part of a small often loathed minority

I can't speak for every Atheist, but I enjoy thinking about the world. I care about whether my beliefs are true. I enjoy being free to think freely. There's nothing about "being contrary" that is particularly enjoyable. I don't think anyone likes being "loathed", in fact, I find it unconstitutional that I am loathed because I'm not superstitious.

Some atheists just like to think there much smarter than most and therefore their belief isn't for the gullible masses.

It has nothing to do with being smarter. Do you think you're smarter than Muslims? Hindus? I think that I subjected my religious beliefs to a process of critical scrutiny, and the result was that they were negated. I think that if any Theist did what I did, they would no longer believe them. My experience is that the ones I know, have not. And to some extent, believing things without questioning them is "gullible". You can infer whatever you want from that.

Almost every thought you've written required some degree of correction and I just don't have anymore time to address any more. All people deserve dignity, I agree. However, I am not, nor is anyone else in the world obligated to respect the things they believe. If they conduct themselves with dignity, and they do not impose their beliefs on others, I am happy to get along. I can even have a discussion. But if they fail to follow the rules of rational discourse during that discussion, I am not required or obligated to ignore it on the basis that they have fixed their emotions to their intellectual miscues. I think if I were a Theist again, I'd stop getting offended, and start thinking.