(July 16, 2015 at 8:10 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Something written and edited by actual philosophers would be a good start. I have quoted from the two most prominent encyclopedias of philosophy. You have given me nothing in return. Given your logic, theists could simply define their position as, "The true belief that God exists" and then say, "See! God does exist!". No, that is not how it works, atheists try to redefine the word atheism because they are trying to avoid sharing the burden of proof, unfortunately for them it simply does not work that way. Once you have heard the concept of a god, you now either put forth positive belief or disbelief in this god, there is no longer a lack of belief. I ask you to please demonstrate that groups of people are allowed to redefine the meanings of words for the purpose of personal gain. If a married man thinks he is a bachelor it does not make it so.
I have no problem with the point you are making and have a very simple answer; there is no god. Burden of proof you say? I accept it. At no time has anyone ever perceived any god. Keep in mind that this includes our increasing capability by extending our perception through the use of advancing technology. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence when the claims suggest that evidence should be available, as is the case with claims of the god of Abraham.
God's have only ever existed in the imagination. Truth claims cannot be contingent on any particular person, meaning that the demonstration must be able to be experienced by any person. The world is full of ignorant people assigning causality to a god when they should exclaim "I don't know", but the god itself is always mysteriously undetectable. You share my exact experience in that you cannot touch, hear, see, taste or smell god. It's all in your head. You can believe in a god all you want, but it's not real.
My conclusion is more reasonable. All you have to do to prove me wrong is produce this god of yours so I can experience it and I'll admit I'm wrong.
