Quote from coolsoldier;
“I have trouble grasping the concept that an absence of proof that God exists is proof that God does not exist.”
This is a variant of that old saw “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” In this particular case, I’d have to say yes, it is. Five thousand years of general theist claims and not a shred of evidence. Two thousand years of specific mono-theistic claims and not a shred of evidence. All the while, evidence of a natural universe which works fine without anything supernatural has amounted to a “preponderance of evidence” that the universe has no need of the supernatural. Self important, shaved apes may think they need the supernatural, but the universe quite clearly does not.
Every minute of every day humans make important and binding decisions with far less than 100% certainty. In most instances, true or false beyond reasonable doubt is more than enough. Here’s how I see the situation;
Proposal; “Supernatural things are real” False beyond reasonable doubt.
Observation; “Supernatural things are not real.” True beyond reasonable doubt.
Notice that the first is a claim while the second is not. No one has an obligation to prove a negative while everyone has an obligation to prove a positive claim. A supernatural being is the very epitome of “extraordinary claims”. And you know what that means. The burden of proof has gone unanswered for millennia and I got tired of waiting long ago. Should any actual evidence come along Ill give it serious consideration.
Regarding the concept “debate”…….well, there isn’t any debate, nor can there be. There are only the persistent and unreasonable attacks by believers against any who disagree with them. They attempt to invent their own rules for logic, reason and acceptable evidence which the various disciplines of science cannot indulge or agree with. If theists would stop trying to insinuate their peculiar beliefs into the secular world, I, for one, would be content.
