Some theists sure do seem to have a smug sense of self-satisfaction regarding their own comprehensive ignorance, including that of the book they claim to believe and base their life on.
You might consider that reasoning and logic are futile but that's an argument and an attempt at reasoning. This is rather like sitting in a tree, cutting off the branch you are sitting on. Do you always avoid reasoning as a general rule because you have concluded it's futile? Do you accept that some arguments presented ANYWHERE are or can be fallacious. Is CIRCULAR REASONING on of those fallacies? Or do you only think that reasoning and logic can be fallacious when atheists use it?
The reason an argument becomes circular, comes down to the EVIDENCE not the logic. The failure to provide OBJECTIVE empirical evidence that does not ASSUME the conclusion or claim being argued is circular. If you are asserting that the bible is truthful book representing a deity, but I suspect you are wrong and it is only the claims of human authors, then the Bible AND it's God are being held as the moot point in question. The Bible can NOT be used to authenticate itself and the god it claims to represent has to be evidenced from entirely other sources.
Conclusion: Using the bible as evidence for the existence of the Christian God, and what that alleged god is supposed to have said (in the Bible itself), ACTUALY IS circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is a fallacy and the comparison of using logic and reason to uphold logic and reason is false, because logic and reason are the tools we apply to the evidence and you are required to provide evidence that is INDEPENDENT of the claim/assertion/conclusion being presented, otherwise you're simply pretending that something is true because 'my book says so' and how do you know that... 'because m book says so'. The fact that theists will try to pull such blatantly absurd 'end runs' around rational inquiry, betrays a deep intellectual dishonesty and an embarrassing ulterior motive of desperate self-mutual deception.
But what should we expect from the mindset of those who have been told and accepted that beliefs are things we can just CHOOSE to accept because we have freewill? The central doctrine of Christianity is an OBLIGATION to CHOOSE what they believe and that is imposed as an emotional gambit, using emotional blackmail/bribery and mindboggling desperation to reinforce oneself and others with the UTMOST confirmation bias, to avoid doubt and uphold pious, faith as the noblest of virtues. Arrogant self righteous delusional ignorance is the only outcome a rational person could expect and Christianity delivers this in spades.
Because people who DONT PRAY, because they don't have imaginary friends and don't believe such activity serves any purpose, would still call their meeting a 'prayer group' and pray to nothing. WTF?
On the other hand THEISTS who do pray to nothing hold meetings to reinforce their delusional pretense and pretend that what they are doing is meaningful because they fear NOT believing and that is in turn because they are taught their 'belief' is a moral imperative and that beliefs can be willfully decided, as if reality conforms to what they DESPERATETY WANT to be true... because of their commitment to the moral imperative and the, motive induced by induced by emotional blackmail and bribery of heaven and hell.
Pretending that atheists would go to a 'prayer meeting', is just moronic projection of the stupid things theists ACTUALY DO.
How about the more important difference between being Atheist and hating god. And the difference between hating a person and hating their ideas. How about': you have the right to be offended, but what you DONT have, is the right to NOT be offended.
If your beliefs are motivated by emotions rather than reason, how about having some humility and not projecting your resentment. It's as if your God were being offended by proxy, because theists KNOW that this god is a figment of their imagination and can't stand mere scrutiny or ridicule. Whining about ridicule and taking it personally is due to the inability separate ideas/belief from self. That is what you'd expect from petty minds with emotional investment in imaginary friends, not humble stoic minds, who can separate their identity from their ideas.
