Atheism

[SteveII]

Wow. So you argument is basically

1. The NT, the early church, the personal experiences of billions of people is not information or facts because I failed to believe they are information or facts.

The NT is not evidence, information or fact it is thus not accepted 

The experience of people is not evidence,information or fact no matter how many it is . Thus it not accepted 

The early churches spotty history is the same . Thus it not accepted

All of this fails as a case for theism thus it is not accepted. So once again Atheism is based on your failure to make a case not any assertion the Atheist is making .  

See bold. Then by that standard nearly all of human knowledge is not "information or fact". Certainly nothing historical. No court case ever. Nothing ever written in a book. Nothing ever told to you in a classroom. What do we have left: video evidence? You are so off base it's sad.

---

"God" must be properly defined and falsifiable before they can even be any evidence. I don't think any theist has even got that far while talking to me.

You are way off. Falsificationism is a philosophy of science principle applied to see if a proposition was scientific or NOT. Popper never meant that it applied to all areas of knowledge. There are huge stretches of human knowledge that are not falsifiable.