That’s called a god of the gaps polemic, it’s reasoning is based on a known common logical fallacy called argumentum ad ignorantiam.
I suggest you search for these and learn what they mean.
You also seem to be including unevidenced assumptions about a deity, in your argument for that deity. This is called a begging the question fallacy.
The same burden of proof applies here, you seem to think that whittling away all falsifiable beliefs, until you’re left with an unfalsifiable core belief, somehow makes it more valid, this is fallacious, and therefore irrational.
Really? I’d like to see some objective evidence demonstrated for that assertion.
Except atheism is not a claim that there is no god, you seem to think disbelief requires contrary evidence to that belief, that’s logically fallacious.
We’ve had many deists use this fallacious argument. Theists often try to use it as well, as if they can build a case step by step for a deity.
If there is no objective evidence then I withhold belief, and that rationale is not limited to god claims.
@Arandomdeist And by what means, do you propose, by which we search for said evidence, that would prove, without question, the nonexistence of any god or gods?
@Sheldon I have no idea why atheists like yourselves, have to keep explaining to these God-believers, what atheism is. Stuff like that really drives me nuts.
Atheism: the disbelief in any god or gods, based on the absence of evidence, which proves the existence of any god or gods. It is the withholding of any belief in any god or gods.
Atheism is NOT the claim that God does not exist. SMH
Do you believe in invisible unicorns, and if you don’t what evidence do you have that they don’t exist?
A few possible reasons:
(1) Because we try to be rational, and assume apologists who come here will also be rational or that they want to learn. (both assumptions are usually incorrect)
(2) Because we are masochists and enjoy the mental equivalent of hitting our head against a brick wall.
(3) Because it demonstrates our superiority to the intellectual equivalent of a troglodyte. (such as our current little friends)
(4) I also become peeved at the cherry picking of their own sacred books but a lack of in depth knowledge. Finally, the stunning level of wilful ignorance. A limited intellect is no one’s fault, but ignorance can be overcome simply if not easily. These drongos won’t even try. Heaven forfend that they question their own beliefs.
Me, I try to have my say against fair targets and then ignore the cunts. The latest is some idiot claiming faith is based on evidence. ( I take that to mean empirical evidence)
That is so easy to do… All you have to do is define your god. Either the evidence supports the assertion or it does not. The evidence itself negates the claim.
Take for example a god that exists beyond time and space. A god that exists for no time and in no space is a god that does not exist by its very definition. It takes time to have a thought, move a finger, or create a world. (At least 6 days with a day of rest on the end.) This God does not exist by definition.
A god that is all merciful and all just does not exist. Mercy is the suspension of justice. The two claims can not co-exist.
A god that created the world and then vanished into the vastness of the universe, as the deists would have, is no different than a god that is not there, so why assume it is there? What argument is there for the existence of a god that has not been founded on fallacies, appeals to emotion, or some revelation of personal experience, all horrible forms of evidence. Psych wards are full of people with such revelations and none of them can turn water into wine.
The only reason your god exists is because you are unable or unwilling to define it. You, like every other theist in the world, will have every god claim you make ripped apart by facts and evidence, then in the end, you will fall back on, “Well, you just gotta have faith.” This is the core of all Theistic Belief. Faith is not a path to truth.
It’s easier to argue against a straw man than it is to actually face an Atheist.
A god is what now?
If it is beyond our comprehension then what evidence do you have that a god(s) exists at all?
You asked for evidence not comprehension. Obviously if I have evidence, I have comprehended something. It’s not my fault you do not see the evidence. You are merely blind to the word of god. That’s on you.