Outnumbered, Outgunned

[419gam]

I don't think you have talked to many people who said they could prove the existence of God. I continue to believe it because it makes sense and because I have seen things that support the idea. I have no burden to prove anything. You continue to believe God does not exist because you believe if you cannot see something it does not exist. You accept that as evidence to support your belief. I use my evidence to support my belief, but neither of us can prove it either way and since neither of us claim to have the proof to prove our belief to be true, neither of us have any burden of proof.

The burden of truth is always placed on the person making a positive claim. You can't prove the non-existence of something under any circumstances. As has been repeated ad nauseum on CF, I could claim that the world is constantly monitored by invisible ghost pirates from another planet. There is now way to disprove the existence of invisible ghost pirates, but because I am making the positive claim, it doesn't matter. Until I can provide evidence for the existence of these ghost pirates the assumption is that they do not exist.

Lack of evidence for somethings non existence is not equal to lack of evidence for its existence. No matter how strongly people may wish it isn't so, logically things are not accepted as truth until there is evidence provided for there existence. The fact that there is no evidence for God one way or the other does not excuse Theists from the burden to prove that a supernatural deity does exist.

 

[Beastt]

I don't think you have talked to many people who said they could prove the existence of God. I continue to believe it because it makes sense and because I have seen things that support the idea. I have no burden to prove anything. You continue to believe God does not exist because you believe if you cannot see something it does not exist. You accept that as evidence to support your belief. I use my evidence to support my belief, but neither of us can prove it either way and since neither of us claim to have the proof to prove our belief to be true, neither of us have any burden of proof.

It's not just that we can't see God. God can't be, (or hasn't been), credibly evidenced. And it isn't that we haven't tried. There is a lot more than sight, taste, smell, touch and hearing which we've attempted to apply to the suggestion that God exists. We look to the Bible to see what might be expected of God. We find that God is said to abhore sin and is all-powerful. So, logically, we should be able to conclude that God doesn't exist because he doesn't use his infinite power to remove sin.

The Christians counter; "Free will"​

We're told that God answers prayers and thusly conclude that statistics should bear out that prayer offers different results than lack of prayer.

The Christians counter; "God will not be tested"​

We see a category 5 hurricane rip apart countless lives and tsunamis wipe 165,000 people off the face of the Earth and see nothing from this caring God to intercede.

The Christians counter; "The Lord works in mysterious ways."​

We observe that God fails to make himself known to us despite the ease with which this could be done and note that for everyone he fails to convince, there will be one more soul thrust into enternal torment.

The Christians counter; "Open your heart to God and he will prove his existence." (Which amounts to; if you believe, then you will believe.)​

We note that logic dictates that God does not exist.

The Christians counter; "Where logic fails, faith prevails."​

It's not that we're not attempting to apply every possible measure for God, it's that each one of these measures fails. And for every failed measure, those who believe have a specific pre-devised argument. But after a while it begins to look like someone attempting to cover for a bad lie. Christians have had thousands of years to think of these reasons/excuses for the failure of evidence to exist where the belief system suggests that it should. There are just too many things wrong with the whole belief system. There isn't any credible evidence in a scenario which should be over-flowing with evidence.

So to all of the specific little phrases that Christians use to excuse the lack of evidence, atheists collectively apply but one phrase; "There is no God". And that one phrase covers all that the multitude of phrases, pre-devised arguments and inconsistencies do not.

 

[Received]

We look to the Bible to see what might be expected of God. We find that God is said to abhore sin and is all-powerful. So, logically, we should be able to conclude that God doesn't exist because he doesn't use his infinite power to remove sin.

Sin is inherently mingled with the concept of freedom; it is sin that is a sort of rebellion against a clear conscience, resulting ontologically in the negation of the self. In other words, to speak within sanity, God cannot destroy sin given that sin is based in human freedom. Now, He can attempt to negate all such through an act of wooing the sinful unto repentance; which implies that a relative acceptance of Him is necessary. It is no use speaking of sinfullness as a problem when the solution to sinfulness involves the resolution of the person who considers it a problem towards repentance. Moreover, yes, I believe that eventually, given enough time (I am the evil universalist, after all), humankind will condition themselves to the good, whether in this life, or a perhaps necessary and vague post-mortem judgment. I think the difficulty that is presented before your eyes involves a specific time-line that you don't approve of -- i.e. it isn't immediate. But there are presumably good reasons for this.

We're told that God answers prayers and thusly conclude that statistics should bear out that prayer offers different results than lack of prayer.

I really find any meta-analyses on prayer a way of hedging the bets of both sides.

Theist: why, the prayers didn't show effect because people prayed with an intention to test God; or their prayers weren't genuine.

Atheist: why, there is no evidence that what was prayed for would not have happened any other way than if it weren't prayed for.

 

[CSMR]

Gallup: Poll Finds Americans' Belief in God Remains Strong

I don't think so. This mistake comes from taking people at their word.