Theism: providing evidence

[JustWondering]

I agree with you. Atheists all the time ask evidence while if one asks on what positive evidence they have accepted Atheism, they start come to burden of proof, in other words they are just blank and can provide no evidence.
Regards

Your reasoning is so wrong. Let me apply your own twisted reasoning to you. How many gods don't you believe in? Where is your positive evidence that ALL OTHER god concepts ever suggested throughout history that you don't believe in are false? If you can't provide said evidence and you insist it is logical to believe in the supernatural than you must really be a polytheist.

 

[paarsurrey]

I don't agree with one's reasoning. The question which god to be believed is to be decided among the believers and that is decided with attributes of god. The Atheism who have gone out of the belief in God has nothing to say in this matter. On what positive evidence did they opt for Atheism is relevant to them.
Regards

 

[outhouse]

I don't agree with one's reasoning.

That's does not matter.

The question which god to be believed is to be decided among the believers

Your not showing reasoning by saying faith should dictate what is real and what is not real.

It is like saying only biased jury's should see trials

 

[outhouse]

I am not against science

yes you are

you place a book containing mythology before science

 

[JustWondering]

I don't agree with one's reasoning. The question which god to be believed is to be decided among the believers and that is decided with attributes of god. The Atheism who have gone out of the belief in God has nothing to say in this matter. On what positive evidence did they opt for Atheism is relevant to them.
Regards

On what positive evidence do you deny Ra, Odin, and Zeus's existence? On what positive evidence do you deny the existence of leprechauns? If you don't have positive evidence against their existence then it is not reasonable for you to deny their existence. According to your flawed reasoning, EVERYTHING within the realm of imagination is to be considered plausible until positive evidence can be presented against it. Tell me, what evidence would convince you that fairies do not exist?

 

[gnostic]

On what positive evidence do you deny Ra, Odin, and Zeus's existence? On what positive evidence do you deny the existence of leprechauns? If you don't have positive evidence against their existence then it is not reasonable for you to deny their existence. According to your flawed reasoning, EVERYTHING within the realm of imagination is to be considered plausible until positive evidence can be presented against it. Tell me, what evidence would convince you that fairies do not exist?

Theists, some theists that is, because not all theists are the same, get the world, or more precisely, reality - backward.

They, like paarsurrey here, want to what they believe in and for everyone else to accept their belief as real first...despite the lack of evidences for what they believe in.

This position is not at all logical. Because otherwise - like you have said - then everyone must accept other gods to be real, by default.

And like you have said, going by his logic (twisted as they are), we will have to accept fairies to be real. Or angels with 4, 6 or 8 wings, or angel with four faces (or 4 heads), etc. Or the ridiculous jinns, creatures of smokeless fire, shapeshifters in the Qur'an. Muslims might as well as believe in fairies, if they can believe in jinns.

Paarsurrey may say no one can disprove God, but can he disprove Ra, Zeus or Odin? If he can't, he has to accept them as real too.

 

[paarsurrey]

They, like paarsurrey here, want to what they believe in and for everyone else to accept their belief as real first...despite the lack of evidences for what they believe in.

One shouldn't forget it is the Atheism people, all of them, who have accepted Atheism without an evidence, repeat without an evidence, repeat without an evidence. Right?
Regards

 

[gnostic]

For there to be existence of anything, there has to be evidences to support such existence.

So if there are no evidences whatsoever, it doesn't exist. Therefore,

Evidences = EXISTENCE
No evidences = NO EXISTENCE​

There absolutely no evidences for the existence of any god, which included the Abrahamic deity, whom the Jews called YHWH or El, and Muslims called Allah. God exist through belief ONLY, therefore because of FAITH.

And neither faith, nor belief, are evidences.

And without evidences, that's called blind faith.

 

[outhouse]

One shouldn't forget it is the Atheism people, all of them, who have accepted Atheism without an evidence

Your factually in error.

It is only us who have evidence ONLY man wrote the text.

It is YOU who has no evidence at all. Your god does not even exist scientifically because there is nothing to observe, NO EVIDENCE.