What is Atheism?

[masterofpuppets]

I cannot address all the individual points in the flurry of responses, so my apologies in advance to anyone who feels ignored.

Suppose Joe Blow is on trial for murder. It is incumbent on the prosecution show Joe is indeed guilty. The prosecution presents as evidence a bloody garment found in Joe’s car, a witness who says he heard Joe arguing with the victim, and a gun in Joe’s apartment that matches the caliber of the bullet found in the victim’s body. At this point, the defense does not say to the jury, “See! They have no evidence!” Instead the defense must give reasons why the evidence does not support prosecution’s case. Maybe, Joe cut himself in an accident. Maybe the witness isn’t reliable because of dementia. Maybe it wasn’t the same gun as the murder weapon.  Unless the defense comes up with plausible reasons to not accept the evidence, the facts of the case will stand in favor of the prosecution.

With respect to the proposition that God exists, lots of evidence has been presented. I will even agree that not all of the evidence supports the conclusion that God exists. For example, I think the design arguments are particularly weak. But it would be silly for me to deny the clear and obvious fact that living systems do indeed appear to be designed. Sure it’s evidence but not evidence that supports the claim.

So if I tell my friend the Good News about Jesus Christ, he may ask me why I believe it. In reply I could perhaps present the ‘minimal facts’ argument about the resurrection. If he says I didn’t convince him that means he obviously harbors some objections to the ‘minimal facts’ -  objections I failed to address. It would be dodgy of him, after having heard my schpeel, to pretend like I didn’t give him evidence and that he didn’t have reasons for not believing me. That is why I simply do not buy the whole ‘lack of belief’ story. Sure atheists lack belief, but they are also incredulous. They have objections and those objections are also subject to scrutiny.

You claim that living organisms appear to be designed, but that does not amount to evidence that they were actually designed. You would need to demonstrate that they were indeed designed as well as the processes involved.

Also, it's not that your friend is pretending like you didn't give evidence. It's that your evidence was not sufficient. You are assuming that every claim can be accepted as long as there is some evidence. In truth, different claims require different levels of supporting evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. However, even if that were not the case, the "evidence" for Jesus Christ is barely evidence at all.

"Lack of belief" simply means "lack of belief in the claim that a God exists". That's the best way to describe the atheistic position. It's just like how you (most probably) lack a belief in the claim that aliens are visiting the Earth. The reasons you lack a belief in that claim are the reasons atheists lack a belief in yours. "Lack of belief" is not something atheists simply say to dismiss theistic claims, simply because they don't agree. It's because they are not convinced that such claims are true.