RicOlie_2 said:
I'm pretty sure this is wrong. Atheists are making the claim, since they're in the minority. Most people believe a god exists. Therefore, the burden of the proof is on the non-believers to show that he does not. If someone thinks a certain god is the right one, the burden of proof is on that person, since their is no majority agreement on any specific god.
It's like if I decided to become an a-atomist, because I believed atoms weren't real. In that case, the burden of proof would be on me, because it's generally accepted that they are. I can't just say "hey, I don't find the reasons for their existence convincing, there just isn't any evidence for them," and expect people to think it a valid position to hold (I'm not saying that atheism isn't, however).
The main difference is that atoms are real and we can see them, we can test them, we can name their properties, we can change them, study them, etc. There is no debate on the existing of the atoms because there is enough evidence to support the claims even if someone does not belive in atoms despite the evidence, science doesn't care if you believe or not in it... god on the other hand even that it is a supreme being can't provide enough evidence to settle the debate once and for all, and again, here we are still debating interpretations over ancient books. He talked Abraham into killing his son but he can't whisper me in the ear that he is real? Odd
I don't see why the atheists have to provide evidence of the NOT existence of a god just because we are a minority, the fact that the majority of people believe in a god (not even the same one) does not make god real; to support a claim you must provide evidence and not the number of how many people believe in a claim.
I'm not making a claim here since I don't have to, I'm just saying that the evidence provided to support the claims of the existence of a god are flaw and not conclusive. I'm not claiming that there is not a god, I'm claiming that the evidence provided to support your claim of the existence of your god is not valid because it contradicts the reality and knowledge of the world we all live in.
If I come to you and say that there is a magic teapot orbiting Venus:
A) Should I, as the person making the claim, provide evidence of what I'm saying is real or
B) Should you provide the evidence that my claim is false?
The burden of proof is on the person making a claim and not on the person that is part of the minority.