Devil's Advocate

[Esquilax]

So do you see the problem? To use the standard arguments calling for 'proof' while ignoring existing proof would make me portray the atheist as a hypocritical moron. Yet the irony is I was planing to use arguments I have already faced

Well, except that the issue isn't ignoring existing proof, really; it's understanding that the type of proof being presented is insufficient as verification of the types of claims being made, if we're talking religious claims specifically and not, say, just whether or not Jesus existed.