(June 2, 2015 at 4:37 pm)PhilliptheTeenageAtheist Wrote: Drich, I'm not going to respond to your entire post, but I will at least address what you said about proof.
I believe a lot of atheists misunderstand the concept of "burden of proof". The burden of proof always lies on the person making the positive claim. HOWEVER, "there is no god" is, contrary to popular belief, just as much of a positive claim as "there IS a god". However, a lot of us are agnostic atheists (probably most of us actually. I don't think I've ever heard someone call themselves a gnostic atheist.), and since agnostic claims are NOT positive, "there is a god" is ultimately the claim with the burden of proof.
Ok, sport. What if One makes the Claim there is a God and He can be found in central park on second bench on the left going up the hill to the strawberry fields every other Saturday from 8:00AM to 10:30 AM? Where can 'proof' be found in this set of instructions? Are instructions or directions a philosophical exercise that can demand proof from the one simply repeating said directions? Or is 'proof' to be found in the following of said instruction to ultimately find what was sought?
If I tell my sister to tell my mother I will be 45 mins late to dinner, where can my sister provide her proof of what she heard me tell her? The 'Proof' that what my sister relayed was indeed accurate can only be verified by me, by me either showing up 45 mins late, or asking me.
Like wise God makes the claim He is alive and Provides proof if we 'ABC' If we 'ABC' He will 123... So if you want 'proof' of God you will have to Follow his Instructions. My only task here is to relay them when asked.
Otherwise know, your trying to assign a philosophical 'rules' to a exercise that are not bound by them.
