[David Sklansky]

Good post. Here's where I stand on some of these points.

"This must sadden you, so you share the anguish, sometimes even more than with a believer who can rationalize an afterlife."

Exceptionally true. And by itself a strong refutation to those who think that most nonbelievers feel the way they do because it helps them pshychologically.

"So much time and energy has been wasted on a lie. This is not reasonable, rational, nor productive."

That irks me big time. BluffTHIS comments that he is more interested in the afterlife than in curing cancer would bother me even if I thought there WAS an afterlife. It is insane if there isn't.

"Some of these people are actually intelligent. You've judged some of them to be equal or even smarter then yourself. They know what you know. Shouldn't they know better? To figure this out. Ask yourself, why is it you can't convince intelligent, rational people that they believe in a lie?"

I am now quite sure that intelligent believers have a syndrome similar to stroke victims who think they are not paralyzed. However I also believe that people who are highly intelligent or highly trained in logic and statistical inference, are often able to overcome this syndrome.

"Now some of you nonbelievers aren't smart enough to outreason an intelligent believer."

Guess what. No unintelligent person should be a serious non believer! If he is, it is for the wrong reasons. Because God wouldn't allow tsunamis or because God wouldn't hate gays, etc. etc. The better arguments against a personal God are scientifically and mathematically not easy to understand. A low IQ person is very unlikely to have followed the reasoning. It is not at all clear to me that the world would be a better place if people didn't believe in a personal God. It would only be a better place if very smart people didn't.