[HangnJudge]

Into blinding darkness enter those who worship ignorance
and into greater darkness those who worship knowledge alone.

Isavasya Upanishad 9

[SamuraiScot]

We are more than cells, synapses and sex drives.

Oops, once you concede that, it's game over. If atheism could just pass that "common sense" barrier. You know, how everything's an accident, creation of the sun, mitochondria inside our cells, little girls and flowers, Mozart—just like accidentally dropping a bit of mayo on your tie at lunch.

[Soothesayer]

I’ve heard the nonreligious talk about their “spirituality”. It consists mostly of egotism. It is love of one’s own intelligence rather than love of nature, humanity, etc as they may try to claim. This is why you often see new-agers siding with terrorists and expressing their hatred of those who defend the rights of the innocent. Their ego always comes before love of others. Also, you may hear them speak about “holding the universe in your mind” or some such rubbish. I used to be in to that new age stuff. No thanks, done with it.

I’m still not able to believe in God for the reasons stated in the article. In many cases, if you become nonreligious you will never go back to being religious. Likewise, if you were never religious, you will never truly “find God”. There is simply no way for a naturalistic worldview to “convert” to a supernatural one. If you think this happened to you, it didn’t. You were always religious even if you didn’t know it.

[Tax-chick]

While science, logic and reason are on the side of the nonreligious

Nonsense. Logic and reason point to divinity, as their earliest proponents (Greek and Roman) understood. "Science" has to be pre-defined to exclude religion in order to achieve that outcome.

But I'm sure it makes the author feel better to imagine that faith is irrational, bless his heart.

[Nathan Zachary]

"While science, logic and reason are on the side of the nonreligious"

No they aren't. There is absolutely no "science" or "logic" to back up that statement, in fact it goes the other way.

[Nathan Zachary]

"Yes, the evidence for evolution is irrefutable."

Bahhh Hahahaha! Only if you don't bother to check to see how valid those THEORIES are, and how many other THEORIES they contradict. Evolutionary "evidence" does a good job of destroying itself.

"Yes, there is a plethora of Biblical contradictions."

Where? Says who- evolutionists? By all means, list them.

"Yes, there is mounting evidence from neuroscientists that suggests that God may be a product of the mind."

Rubbish. Sence of "self" is a product of the mind too. Just ask any Marxist.

[Gondring]

We are more than cells, synapses and sex drives. We are amazing, mysterious creatures forever in search of something greater than ourselves.

Not mutually exclusive.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

Maybe, but a study entitled “Faith in Flux” issued this week by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life questioned nearly 3,000 people and found that most children raised unaffiliated with a religion later chose to join one. Indoctrination be damned. By contrast, only 14 percent of those raised Catholic and 13 percent of those raised Protestant later became unaffiliated.

By most I assume he meant over 50% but of those 3000 how many were raised unaffiliated with a religion?

In 1996 8% of the country said they had no religious affiliation at least some of these adults would have been children then so let's use that number.

That would be 240 adults.

51% would be 122 adults that chose to join a religion after not being raised religious. Now 56% of the population claimed Protestant affiliation at that time. So that would be 1680 people in the survey. At 13% later becoming unaffiliated that would be 218.

What does this mean? That a small number of people may rock the statics on a small group.

And a survey of 240 adults is far too small to draw any sort of conclusion.