Atheists don't realize asking for evidence of God is a strawman

[Amarok]

Or better still 

[LuisDantas]

Am I missing something?

It seems to me that the only reason why one would even talk about evidence for the existence of God would be due to expectations of non-spontaneous belief.

Keep in mind this is not supposed to be used in an actual conversation, this is just a "gotcha". Some atheists sometimes go "aha but there is no evidence of God so everything you just said is invalid" instead of engaging in a conversation. This is just my gotcha lol.

Now if you want to debate the validity of this "gotcha", okay

The strawman, therefore, comes from those expectations, which fail to consider that people are entitled to simply disregard theistic belief.

But that's still just a explanation for why you use a strawman, it still is a faulty argument though....

---

Are you sure you understand what a strawman is ?

Sure, a strawman is when a person attack a position someone else doesn't hold and then pretend like they "defeated" that view.

I think you have just counter-evidenced what you say.

People are pressured into unreasonable situations.  They point out that those situations are unreasonable.  Doing so is not using a strawman.

[Cyberman]

Let me try to put it as simply as I can.

This is me:

There I am, going about my normal day (for a given value of 'normal'), which for me contains zero gods. You are recommending new element, a new product that will totally change my life, with the miracle ingredient Goddo.

What can you offer me to get me to part with my money?

[I_am_not_mafia]

Nowhere in the Bible does it claim to be a scientific textbook, it's a religious textbook and it's called the Christian faith not the Christian science.

So are you admitting that the Bible is fiction?

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

Nowhere in the Bible does it claim to be a scientific textbook, it's a religious textbook and it's called the Christian faith not the Christian science.

So are you admitting that the Bible is fiction?

You didn't read the whole OP?

The most obvious reply will be "So if Bible isn't scientific it isn't real is it lolololol". You can use the same trick atheists use(It's not that I DON'T believe in God or claim God doesn't exist, I just reject the claim). Just reply "I never claimed Bible isn't scientific, I just reject your claim that Bible is scientific because you didn't provide any evidence to back it up"

[The Grand Nudger]

Magic book doesn't use the method to begin with, and application of the method has falsified claims that cannot be coherently excised from the narrative.  

There's your evidence.

[I_am_not_mafia]

I read the whole OP but my question still applies. Is your bible fiction or are you trying to convince others that it describes reality?

The scientific method is nothing more than a way to investigate, understand and describe reality and to inform others about the findings. People have been trying to do this longer than the scientific method has been around. The scientific method is just the most effective way of achieving this

So it comes down to, is the bible fiction? If you say that it is not, then you need to provide evidence.

Your OP is just a way of trying to wriggle out of the burden of doing so.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I didn't look up the definition just now, I knew it already. I also knew its meaning while I used it in my op as well. Be specific, which part do you disagree with in the op and why?

Asking for evidence is not strawmanning.

Yeah because the OP is totally just "asking for evidence is strawmannning" get the fuck out of here with your trolling dude 🖕

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm trying to figure out what you take issue with;

That some atheist is willing to consider magic book as a series of claims that purport to report facts?

Or that, having considered this as a possibility even if only for the purposes of discussion....they then have the gall to ask which of the purported facts can be demonstrated (and which can be falsified) by a reliable standard of evidence?

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

So it comes down to, is the bible fiction? If you say that it is not, then you need to provide evidence.

I'm not claiming anything I'm just pointing out that asking for evidence for a God is a strawman.

Your OP is just a way of trying to wriggle out of the burden of doing so.

Exactly. I essentially framed the situation as "if you want to see evidence for God prove bible is a scientific work first".

What I said earlier:

Keep in mind this is not supposed to be used in an actual conversation, this is just a "gotcha". Some atheists sometimes go "aha but there is no evidence of God so everything you just said is invalid" instead of engaging in a conversation. This is just my gotcha lol.

Now if you want to debate the validity of this "gotcha", okay

This is not an actual thing, I'm not going to say this during a conversation with a non believer, it's just a "gotcha" to use if and only if a asshole decide to do it first.

Think of this as just a thought exercise. How do you respond without any appeal to emotion..just plain logically?