One simple question

[tavarish]

Your method is not a 100% guarantee.

Nor did I say it was. My method is, however, consistent with reality thus far, without drawing fantastical conclusions, irrational elements, or unverifiable constructs. It isn't perfect, as my perception can be skewed. For this, self doubt is a necessary part of the equation.

For instance, all tests on the jar cannot absolutely rule out the possibility of a mind in a jar.

My method doesn't hope to absolutely rule out anything, but it can assess things by way of evidence. Acceptance is constructed upon evidence to support a certain assertion. A disembodied mind would have to be, by definition, a demonstrable element within that jar to be considered part of existence and reality.

So how should one go about with choosing between methods? Why is your method any better than the rest?

I never said my method was any better. I just want to understand the method that theists use.

Your question may be simple, but does it have a simple answer?

There is no right or wrong answer. It's not a trick question. I just want to get to why atheists and theists disagree on such a basic level.