Atheists don't realize asking for evidence of God is a strawman

[Rhondazvous]

Sometimes it's good to have a conversation with a non believer because you learn certain things from them and they learn certain things from you because you're both open minded and you both have a good conversation.

Other times some people are just close minded, they don't care about having a conversation, they're just there to show their "dominance" over you with comments that degrade virgin Mary, how you're too weak minded to be believing in "made up stories", or just to poke fun at you. Well, you can tell these assholes asking for evidence of God is silly according to their own standards. Why?

Because it's a strawman fallacy. How?

Only scientific textbooks needs to provide scientific evidence.

Nowhere in the Bible does it claim to be a scientific textbook, it's a religious textbook and it's called the Christian faith not the Christian science.

So when someone asks for scientific evidence they themselves are asserting that Bible is a scientific textbook(which it never claimed) and then asks for evidence(which it doesn't have to present).

So next time someone just wants to shut you down, you can do the same thing to them. Ask them to show where in the bible it claims to be a scientific textbook and then you'll give the scientific evidence.

The most obvious reply will be "So if Bible isn't scientific it isn't real is it lolololol". You can use the same trick atheists use(It's not that I DON'T believe in God or claim God doesn't exist, I just reject the claim). Just reply "I never claimed Bible isn't scientific, I just reject your claim that Bible is scientific because you didn't provide any evidence to back it up"

Obviously only use this against assholes that just want to mock and belittle you, having a discussion is always good but some people are just assholes that doesn't deserve a decent conversation and it also doesn't hurt to have a bigger arsenal.

No the bible does not claim to be a science book. It doesn’t even provide an unequivocal account of salvific requirements.

16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

Did Jesus tell the man there’s nothing he can do, that salvation is free to all who believe?

17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

But Paul disagrees

6 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Unless I’m mistaken, the rich man to whom Jesus was speaking in Matthew was made of flesh as were all Jews in the old dispensation, so when Paul says no flesh he precludes the idea that there’s a different requirement for Jews during the Old Testament. Yet Jesus told the man he could enter life by keeping the law.

So you and countless other Christians will stand before god trying to explain why you believed Paul knew more about salvation than Jesus did.

Science aside, to put one’s trust in a book that equivocates about the most basic thing, is a good way to set yourself up for disappointment.