Firstly, you are the only one who seems to think that the statement (and it is a statement, not a "non-statement") is allowed to fly by itself without any supporting argument.
It's not allowed, it never has been. You can't just state something exists and expect people to believe you. Arguments have been created over millennia for the existence of God, and if you don't know about them, I suggest you google "arguments for the existence of god" and have a long read.
When people say "God exists" as a single statement, it does not necessarily mean that they are using it on it's own, without any arguments. They may have arguments, but it is silly to cite every single one of them when you are making a simple claim. If someone challenges your claim, you present arguments. For instance, I can say "I exist" as a statement, alone, on it's own. You probably wouldn't question me, since you probably believe that I exist as well. However, if you were to question me, I could provide arguments for my existence. Just because I didn't present my arguments beforehand doesn't mean I don't have any.
Secondly, I don't think many people think "god exists" is a scientific statement. It's a statement of logic, a proposition, but not all propositions are scientifically testable. Indeed, this is why people have argued that science isn't an answer for everything, and that the existence of certain unscientific propositions is an argument against materialism.
Finally, to address your "needing to be disproved" part. I wouldn't say anything has a "need" to be disproved. I'm agnostic, so I don't think these things can be proved or disproved either way. God as I define it, is a being that possibly exists outside of the observable reality, and since the observable reality is all we have to go on at this point in time, I cannot see a way of proving or disproving the existence of such a being. That may change of course, but currently such knowledge is unknowable.
It's not allowed, it never has been. You can't just state something exists and expect people to believe you. Arguments have been created over millennia for the existence of God, and if you don't know about them, I suggest you google "arguments for the existence of god" and have a long read.
When people say "God exists" as a single statement, it does not necessarily mean that they are using it on it's own, without any arguments. They may have arguments, but it is silly to cite every single one of them when you are making a simple claim. If someone challenges your claim, you present arguments. For instance, I can say "I exist" as a statement, alone, on it's own. You probably wouldn't question me, since you probably believe that I exist as well. However, if you were to question me, I could provide arguments for my existence. Just because I didn't present my arguments beforehand doesn't mean I don't have any.
Secondly, I don't think many people think "god exists" is a scientific statement. It's a statement of logic, a proposition, but not all propositions are scientifically testable. Indeed, this is why people have argued that science isn't an answer for everything, and that the existence of certain unscientific propositions is an argument against materialism.
Finally, to address your "needing to be disproved" part. I wouldn't say anything has a "need" to be disproved. I'm agnostic, so I don't think these things can be proved or disproved either way. God as I define it, is a being that possibly exists outside of the observable reality, and since the observable reality is all we have to go on at this point in time, I cannot see a way of proving or disproving the existence of such a being. That may change of course, but currently such knowledge is unknowable.
