Best Theistic Arguments

[Mystic]

Theists do have the burden of the proof but now that I'm finally understanding, if and only if those listening are actually trying to understand and listen.

Argument tends to be an adversarial process, largely as a result of biases of which we are not conscious.  Given the biases propelling the dynamic seem to operate subconsciously, it's hard to imagine argument working out any other way, even with the best of intentions.  Some methods, like the Delphi method, aim to get around this, with some success, but a Delphi is the exception, not the norm.   There appear to be strong evolutionary reasons why our social habits of argument evolved this way.

I think what you mean by "actually trying" is that unless they agree with you, they are lying and subject to "dark forces."  On top of that, you don't bother to apply the same standard when you're evaluating opponent's counter-arguments.  You've effectively said that if you don't agree with such, you just dismiss them.  That essentially makes your complaint here an example of hypocrisy.  You're a dishonest cad, MK.

It doesn't matter about bias. If people just want to be argumentative and aren't will to digest your information and constantly try to side track the discussion and don't try to understand your proof and do their best to manipulate the conversation to make it ambiguous rather then seek clarity, it's not binding a person with such proof to present to such people.

Yes Theists have the burden of proof, as does God foremost have the burden of proof to prove his religion and himself if he exists and there is true path and way to him. But it's not upon either God or Messengers or Guides or their followers, to be burdened with convincing anyone and they can if they please turn away from presenting proofs they know to a crowd that has proven no interest to learning them but just want to argue and bicker no matter what truth there is.

What you said is probably true about me,  but if I know the truth and you guys are interested, from my perspective, I should present it, otherwise, if people are only interested in trying to put the proof and light manifested by their mouths and mock the sacred truth manifested in the dialogues I provide, I am not required to convince people or even present further clarification when people are interested in confusion only.