Delicate Offers a Truce

[Delicate]

You're not interested in providing this evidence you say you have for your beliefs? Really? I should think as a born-again Christian you'd be all about that, given your obligation to spread the Good News.

That's the evidence people are interested in seeing.

You do remember your bio information, don't you?

I used to be an apatheist.

Then I heard Richard Dawkins speak, saw how ridiculous he was and I became a born-again Christian. Delicate

Leaving aside what a laughably bad reason that is for adopting a particular religious faith, it's your "evidence" for the truth of your alleged Christian faith that we're waiting on. Can I make this any clearer for you?

You're still working on the assumption that I want to prove theism.

I don't.

I want to (and have) proven that most atheistic claims are false.

If you can't prove theism, then you didn't disprove atheism, so to speak. Atheism means not believing in Gods. You can only "dispel" atheism by convincing all atheists that God exists. If you can't convince me that God exists, then you didn't do a damn thing to atheism, even if I were the only atheist in the world.

Not necessarily, because I see two distinct projects: refuting objections to theism and making arguments for theism.

One is a negative project another is positive.

And frankly, the positive case requires far more background work, especially given that many people here aren't even capable of rational responses, and I mean that as a matter of fact, not an insult.

There are places where the caliber of atheist thought is more sophisticated. There the positive case is more cost-effective to make.