Try God...

[Mister Agenda]

It's also a strawman. Don't try bullshitting us, we've eaten these arguments a long time ago. Find me a single atheist that has ever said "life came from nothing!" or admit that you're just lying.

Are you kidding me? You have more flavours of atheism around here than Baskin & Robbins!

LOL, all you were asked to do was find a single atheist claiming what you said we claim. One! You're hilariously evasive.

[Faith No More]

IF there is NO GOD... Why are YOU here?

Aint it "dumb" to argue about something that doesn't exist?

Why do you need to come here and state the obvious? Why waste a minute of your valuable, short time on earth with me and the others disproving ghosts?

Don't you have better things to do?

At least I, and the others have a cause. From your "logical" pov... you and the others are the ignoramuses.

I'm sorry, but when a theist starts trotting out this tripe, it's time to simply dismiss anything they say afterwords.

I wouldn't give two shits about debating whether god exists or not if theists didn't feel the right dictate how I live my life and how my country should be run based on their interpretation of their deity's will. There wouldn't be a need to argue if there were no self-righteous zealots that think they have a holy mandate to force everyone else to conform to their standards.

So, what is the reason we debate this? Because too many theists can't seem to understand that they don't have the right to cram their shit down everyone else's throat.

If you don't want to hear atheists bitch about religion, talk to your brothers in christ.

[Mister Agenda]

Let me ask you again.... How did everything come into existence? Unless you can give me a concise answer then you have no grounds for saying that God doesn't exist! Simple.

Requirements you pull out of your ass can be as simple as you want them to be. But I'll play on your field. Presumably the converse is true: unless you can give me a concise answer on how everything came into existence, you have no grounds for saying God exists. Simple! Not really, of course, there's absolutely no basis to presume the answer to such a question would be concise, but it's your demand, meet it yourself if you can.

Just remember that a 'who' or 'what' answer is a non-sequitur in response to a 'how' question. If I ask you how an automobile is made, telling me that they're made by factory workers or with tools doesn't actually answer the question, any more than 'quantum physics' would be an answer that would satisfy you regarding how the universe came into existence. When you ask a magician how he performed a trick and he answers 'with magic!', he's not answering your question, he's evading it.

[Godscreated]

BWS says you need to prove your positive statement.

Philosophy says it, not I. And that's what he's doing. Indeed, if someone states that "god does not exist", the burden then falls to that person to show why that is. I'm not going to do his work for him, but the points he makes are much more reasonable than the ones that believers in god assert.

I've been here for over three years and not one shred of proof has been given to show God does not exist.

[Silver]

I've been here for over three years and not one shred of proof has been given to show God does not exist.

And during those three years, I am certain the burden of proof has been explained to you ad nauseum. It is your job to prove the extraordinary claim for which there is no apparent evidence, and in my thirty-three years of life I have yet to see any reason given other than you must have faith. Faith is not proof, and if one is going to base a belief on mere faith, one might as well believe in unicorns while one is at it.

[Esquilax]

Just remember that a 'who' or 'what' answer is a non-sequitur in response to a 'how' question. If I ask you how an automobile is made, telling me that they're made by factory workers or with tools doesn't actually answer the question, any more than 'quantum physics' would be an answer that would satisfy you regarding how the universe came into existence. When you ask a magician how he performed a trick and he answers 'with magic!', he's not answering your question, he's evading it.

Yes! Thank you! I toyed with this question on the other page, but it's so nice to see it expressed cogently like this. It's so weird how the theist demands painstaking, step by step proof for scientific principles, but when it comes to their own answer to the same questions, they just shrug and say god did it. Completely ignoring that, even if that were true, it doesn't answer the question at all, and the scientific minded individual wouldn't be satisfied with it. The how is left unanswered, and yet the theist still claims victory...

[Godscreated]

I've been here for over three years and not one shred of proof has been given to show God does not exist.

And during those three years, I am certain the burden of proof has been explained to you ad nauseum. It is your job to prove the extraordinary claim for which there is no apparent evidence, and in my thirty-three years of life I have yet to see any reason given other than you must have faith. Faith is not proof, and if one is going to base a belief on mere faith, one might as well believe in unicorns while one is at it.

You're the one making the positive statement that God does not exist, thus the burden of proof lies with you to give proof to that statement, I've never claimed I can prove God exists, I have given reasons why I know He exists. You need to get off your ad nauseum and get to work.

[Silver]

thus the burden of proof lies with you.

Very well. Considering the veritable lack of evidence in support of a deity means the probability of stated deity existing is rather improbable, especially in terms of thousands of years of human evolution whereby no proof has ever been gleaned.

[Esquilax]

You're the one making the positive statement that God does not exist, thus the burden of proof lies with you to give proof to that statement, I've never claimed I can prove God exists, I have given reasons why I know He exists. You need to get off your ad nauseum and get to work.

Ah ah ah, let's slow down a little. Maelstrom hasn't made the claim that god doesn't exist, just that there's a lack of evidence.

Happily, you just said you know god exists, and that is a positive existential claim, and therefore requires proof. Knowledge is demonstrated, or else it's not knowledge at all. How do you intend to do this?

[Bad Wolf]

You're the one making the positive statement that God does not exist, thus the burden of proof lies with you to give proof to that statement, I've never claimed I can prove God exists, I have given reasons why I know He exists. You need to get off your ad nauseum and get to work.

I explained this to rondee just a page back. Did you not read that page? Well, i will say it again:
Atheists do not claim a god does not exist, we claim we do not believe a god exists. Do you see the difference? We are simply reacting to theist claims.
Theists claim that a god does exist. You claim that you know he exists. The burden of proof is on you to prove your extraordinary claim, it is not up to us to try and disprove you.

I would add a stupid example about unicorns or goblins or something but i get the feeling that what i have just said has been repeated to you many times and that you ignore it completely every time