"This list of questions came from this survey by Matt Slick. The questions are:

How would you define atheism?
Do you act according to what you believe (there is no God) in or what you don’t believe in (lack belief in God)?
Do you think it is inconsistent for someone who “lacks belief” in God to work against God’s existence by attempting to show that God doesn’t exist?
How sure are you that your atheism properly represents reality?
How sure are you that your atheism is correct?
How would you define what truth is?
Why do you believe your atheism is a justifiable position to hold?
Are you a materialist or a physicalist or what?
Do you affirm or deny that atheism is a worldview?
Not all atheists are antagonistic to Christianity but for those of you who are, why the antagonism?
If you were at one time a believer in the Christian God, what caused you to deny his existence?
Do you believe the world would be better off without religion?
Do you believe the world would be better off without Christianity?
Do you believe that faith in a God or gods is a mental disorder?
Must God be known through the scientific method?
If you answered yes to the previous question, then how do you avoid a category mistake by requiring material evidence for an immaterial God?
Do we have any purpose as human beings?
If we do have purpose, can you as an atheist please explain how that purpose is determined?
Where does morality come from?
Are there moral absolutes?
If there are moral absolutes, could you list a few of them?
Do you believe there is such a thing as evil? If so, what is it?
If you believe that the God of the Old Testament is morally bad, by what standard do you judge that he is bad?
What would it take for you to believe in God?
What would constitute sufficient evidence for God’s existence?
Must this evidence be rationally based, archaeological, testable in a lab, etc., or what?
Do you think that a society that is run by Christians or atheists would be safer? Why?
Do you believe in free will? (free will being the ability to make choices without coercion)
If you believe in free will, do you see any problem with defending the idea that the physical brain, which is limited and subject to the neuro-chemical laws of the brain, can still produce free will choices?
If you affirm evolution and that the universe will continue to expand forever, then do you think it is probable that given enough time, brains would evolve to the point of exceeding mere physical limitations and become free of the physical and temporal and thereby become “deity” and not be restricted by space and time? If not, why not? How does one lead to the other?
If you answered the previous question in the affirmative, then aren’t you saying that it is probable that some sort of God exists?
[patheos.com]