BTW, I found your source - Urban Dictionary, definition 2, at http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php... . It also had a definition of a "Good Atheist" that you left out of your post. Here it is:Bad Athiest: A self-involved, egotistical jackass who does not believe in a supreme being not because what they have read or studied but usually because they hate religion or religious people. They usually go out of there way to make religious people feel bad and accuse them of being close-minded while they, themselves, will not listen to any other arguments but there own. They are impossible to try to reason with because they are usually self-centered, condescending,unscientific, and downright immature. Their arguments are usually full of anti-religious cliches and therefore easy to break apart.
Religious Person: I believe in God
Good Atheist: Really? that's interesting. I don't personally but I'd love to sit down with you and discuss the issue sometime
Religious Person: I belive in God
Bad Atheist: WHAT!!!?!? You belive in God?....hahahahaha I don't believe in God I have absolute faith in science because it's completley accurate and irrefutable!!!
"A person who has read and studied thoroughly the concepts of science and religion. He/She has come to the conclusion that there is no supreme being and therefore does not believe in any god or gods. In spite of this however they are open to the concept and enjoy having mature, intellectual debates on the issue without being critical or condescending."
I do not consider that a good model. It serves your purposes, not ours.
Science isn't the reason for atheism. Rational skepticism is.
Why study Christianity? A casual exposure to the brutality and irrationality in its bible, and the hypocrisy, scapegoating and anti-scientism in its church is sufficient.
Most atheists have not come to any conclusion about gods. They simply aren't interested in supported claims that they exist.
"Open to the concept"? What concept? God? Religion? I'm not interested in hearing about your god or your religion at all. What's to discuss? Been there, done that. I'd rather discuss your church, what is happening to it, and why.
"Mature, intellectual debates on the issue without being critical"?
That's inane. The essence of debate is defense of one position and criticism of its alternatives.
As far as condescension goes, sorry, but its the Christians who need to be brought down a peg. Faith is not a virtue. You call yourselves more spiritual and more moral. Both claims are shams.
If telling you so is condescending, then mea culpa.