@Sherlock-Holmes … we do, at times 
can get into a side conversation in posts (usually us old timers who have battled each other and have found common ground; and like each other regardless of differences).
No disrespect intended.
And I am interested in your response.
Please share with me YOUR methodology or process of eliminating the many deities presented to you from modern society & historical cultures - including their claims AND I will see if THAT method is absent of a “decision made on the basis of beliefs”.
Are you saying you have no criteria? that you can only respond by asking me how I make decisions? If atheism was on a strong footing the question would be answered without any fuss, I rest my case.
FOR myself the methology I use for a deity/specific god or gods/holy books/writing/prophecy/conversations with the supernatural etc is the LOWEST (considering the extraordinary claim). I use the low bar of a civil claims court
That’s not very scientific, it relies on some societal, institutional process, but at least you’ve answered me.
My question was a reflection of your own.
So sure, I’ll answer. There is an absence of evidence. All we’ve seen is evidence of a religious movement. Historically the bible was written by a slew of anonymous authors in 325 A.D. There is no evidence for this god thing Christians claim exist. What I have heard from them is wishy washy experiences, ignorant remarks about their bible, and more stories. Not just that, but there are tons of religions out there making the same play. Like the Muslims for example, they have the same debates that Christians make on here about their god. Xtians argue their belief on the subject and say “there’s evidence” or “they have evidence” but never back it with any nor do they perform miracles like their gospel Jesus stated in the bible to prove otherwise.
I answered.
You now answer.
Otherwise I may be inclined to If THEISM was on a strong footing the question would be answered without any fuss, I rest my case
So sure, I’ll answer. There is an absence of evidence. All we’ve seen is evidence of a religious movement.
Do you mean all you’ve seen? different people perceive things differently. But even if that were true, how does that answer my question?
Historically the bible was written by a slew of anonymous authors in 325 A.D. There is no evidence for this god thing Christians claim exist.
This is arguable, but again you claim “there is no evidence” for X without proving the claim.
What I have heard from them is wishy washy experiences, ignorant remarks about their bible, and more stories.
This is your interpretation, not proof that there’s no evidence for God.
Not just that, but there are tons of religions out there making the same play. Like the Muslims for example, they have the same debates that Christians make on here about their god. Xtians argue their belief on the subject and say “there’s evidence” or “they have evidence” but never back it with any nor do they perform miracles like their gospel Jesus stated in the bible to prove otherwise.
This isn’t getting us anywhere. You’ve said several times “there’s no evidence” and I want you prove that claim, explain how you examine evidence to decide if it is or is not evidence for God. What tests do you apply, if I were to present evidence what exactly would you do? If you refuse to tell me then how could I show you?
No, I refuse to be drawn at this time. I am asking for the atheist - any atheist here - to state clearly the proof, the reasoning, the process that they used to reach the conclusion “there is no evidence for God”.
For all I know there is no process, perhaps there us just a devotion to the belief that there is no God, I mean if there was some algorithm, some systematic sequence of tests that are applied surely someone would have just listed that by now.
So you won’t answer a question you posed to atheists?
A question I answered. I don’t need to prove the non-existence of something I don’t claim exists 
Perhaps we do not have the vacuous position.
No. I haven’t seen jack shit. I don’t have Christian vision like you do. I just look at how there’s hardly any contemporary evidence for your magic man.
What? So you’re claiming the bible is proof?
I never said it was proof.
That’s cute. Shifting the Burden of Proof. I never claimed a God doesn’t exist. I just stated there was no compelling evidence. That is very true.
No, you cannot go on an Atheist forum and demand we give you evidence for the existence of your god.
Well you can always engage me in the other thread where we’re discussing the impossibility of materially explaining the presence of the universe.
I just asked for your standard for evidence.
The same question you posed here.
Answer it.
Trust me. I’d love to prove “gods” don’t exist. I just don’t have the means and neither do you. Your turn. You made a “god” claim earlier. Now I want you to answer my questions.
" How can a Christian distinguish between something that is evidence for God and something that is not?"
What? So you’re claiming the bible is proof?
What did I say that led you to that interpretation?
I never said it was proof.
Ahh, so its a belief?
That’s cute. Shifting the Burden of Proof. I never claimed a God doesn’t exist. I just stated there was no compelling evidence. That is very true.
I did not say that you made such a claim! How do you know there’s no compelling evidence? you seem very confident yet unable to articulate how you established that view. For all I know you robotically say “that’s no evidence” without a second thought, without there being any analysis or anything, it certainly looks like that to me.
No, you cannot go on an Atheist forum and demand we give you evidence for the existence of your god.
Well I can if I want to, but I did not. I did however ask for you to provide proof, evidence, justification for the claim you keep making that “there’s no evidence for God”.
Trust me. I’d love to prove “gods” don’t exist. I just don’t have the means and neither do you. Your turn. You made a “god” claim earlier. Now I want you to answer my questions.
I have not asked you to prove that gods don’t exist. Go and reread what we’ve been discussing. You are making a claim that you cannot support, that’s fine I just wanted to make that clear.
Then all you have to do is provide some evidence to refute his claim. Please do so.
I’ve explored the Matrix hypothesis (which btw goes in my big pile of “I don’t know”) and it has not yet the means for demonstrable, falsifiability evidence… BUT it is an interesting imaginative brain exercise.
My conclusion is that whether we are in a “simulated” universe (some claim within a simulated, etc) and cannot confirm we are the “Original”… I say, “who cares”
Not much I can do about it in my day-to-day life and the “simulation” has the means of using the “material” universe for scientific purposes and answering what is observable.
Your profile says theist.
He’s asking quite clearly if your criteria for belief in your religion is based on the anonymous hearsay of the gospels, how can you justify disbelieving comparable anonymous hearsay for other religions? Clearly that implies an inherent bias.
You could try inserting the word compelling or convincing before evidence, before we devolve into semantics. Some people find the sight of a black cat ample evidence of impending misfortune, I do not imagine those who find the notion dubious, have wasted a great deal of time constructing a method to measure the validity of the sighting of a black cat against the claim.
I will try once more then, I believe claims that are supported by sufficient (note the qualifying first word) objective (note the criteria for differentiating types of data) evidence.
I’m not sure how I could make this any clearer? Subjective anecdotal claims are not sufficient for me to believe such claims, extraordinary claims means only comparably extraordinary evidence would be sufficient. The sighting of a black cat is neither sufficient nor objective “evidence” for me to believe they represent impending misfortune, see?
Now if we could conduct double blind clinical trials, to measure or quantify some median metric for misfortune, and demonstrate a causal link to sighting cats with black fur, then I will re-evaluate my disbelief.
You’re basically stating there is evidence. If you’re going to tell me I’m wrong. Please show me how I’m wrong.
It’s a conclusion.
You accused me of making a claim about there not being evidence. Show me evidence. Show me that I’m wrong.
Fine. Can you summon your god and perform miracles like it states in the new testament?
Then give me evidence. Teach me if you think you’re so smart. Show me.
One thing is clear, and unsurprising. That is the atheist makes claims that they cannot rationally support. Therefore it is a non-position IMHO. The implied position is one of rational, reasoned, scientific solidity and confidence.
But the replies to my repeated questions are the same replies I’d expect if atheism was just a deeply held conviction, the disregard for clear criteria as to “evidence for God”, the dismissive insistence on the claim “there’s no evidence” seems more like a dogma than a reasoned intellectual position.
To show an atheist evidence is futile, because I have no way of knowing if it will be rejected via a dismissive wave of the hand and not due to an intellectual analysis.
Instead of ranting and raving about atheists making claims. Just know that all we ask is for evidence for this god thing that you believe in. So instead of bitching about it. Do something about it. The theist states that a god exists. The atheist is saying “SHOW ME!”
Show me the evidence you do have.