Hi from Eleazar

[Cinjin]

I haven't made any assertions or claims about God's existence. I'm not here to convince you (or anyone else for that matter) that God meets your own particular personal criteria for whether you should believe that He exists. Frankly, I don't care whether you believe that God exists or not. However, you are claiming (by implication) that evidence is necessary to be rational in believing that God exists, and if you want to hold my beliefs to your subjective standards you'd better shoulder your end of the "burden of proof" bargain and tell me why I should take your standards seriously whatsoever.

So let me get this right ---- you want to be allowed to use ANY argument that you see fit to use as evidence should you deem it worthy by your standards???
There's nothing subjective about the standards we use in judging "evidence" of anything that does or does not exist, whether it be your god or the sun's gravitational pull. The standards are the same and they don't change or bend just because you want one of your silly ideas to be considered "evidence".

I'm rather tired of people playing the "atheism is just a lack of belief" card as if that is sufficient to avoid having to make any arguments in support of their epistemological views.

No matter how many times you say it - the answer is always the same ... the burden of proof lies only with you, but I can still assure you of this ... you'll get an argument in support of our views. Oh you can be damn sure of that.