Alas, though, it overlooks one fallacy of it's own, dismissed in the following observation:

"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence."

Which is not to say that they are wrong about the arguments of theists.

However, I will observe that anyone who's faith and worldview - be it theism OR athiesm depends on convincing others is working from another fallacious premise - that the more people can be convinced of an idea, the more probably true that idea is.

At one point, a great many people. thought the sun revolved around a flat earth, which rested on the back of a giant turtle.

Later on, a great many MORE people believed in the Steady State universe and the Bohr Atom.

Right now, a m...

Alas, though, it overlooks one fallacy of it's own, dismissed in the following observation:

"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence."

Which is not to say that they are wrong about the arguments of theists.

However, I will observe that anyone who's faith and worldview - be it theism OR athiesm depends on convincing others is working from another fallacious premise - that the more people can be convinced of an idea, the more probably true that idea is.

At one point, a great many people. thought the sun revolved around a flat earth, which rested on the back of a giant turtle.

Later on, a great many MORE people believed in the Steady State universe and the Bohr Atom.

Right now, a majority of people believe that time travel is physically impossible.

Alas, the most currently accepted cosmological and physical theories seem to say it is.

This may also say something about misplaced faith in the religion of science.

However, I will observe that anyone who's faith and worldview - be it theism OR athiesm depends on convincing others is working from another fallacious premise - that the more people can be convinced of an idea, the more probably true that idea is.

You are overlooking another common misconception - the proof of the claim falls on those making the claim. The claim of god cannot be proven. Simply because I challenge the claim to be proven does not put the ball in my court to disprove the claim. Even when I bring up evidence to support why I believe a claim is false, that still does not reverse the onus, it only goes to show why I fail to find the original claim as unacceptable.
...

However, I will observe that anyone who's faith and worldview - be it theism OR athiesm depends on convincing others is working from another fallacious premise - that the more people can be convinced of an idea, the more probably true that idea is.

You are overlooking another common misconception - the proof of the claim falls on those making the claim. The claim of god cannot be proven. Simply because I challenge the claim to be proven does not put the ball in my court to disprove the claim. Even when I bring up evidence to support why I believe a claim is false, that still does not reverse the onus, it only goes to show why I fail to find the original claim as unacceptable.

This is why faith is so important to religion - they cannot prove it so depend on people to simply accept it. That is what your argument of "absense of evidence is not evidence" points to. I don't need evidence to disprove god. I merely need to ask for the evidence that proves him.

Interesting video.

Many simply make comments due to ignorance, and that’s OK. The ignorant person is often the more intelligent person and can be taught, become smarter and more learned my mother often said. The stupid person on the other hand, remains the same, steadfastly refusing to learn, standing on their own understanding or even worst, taking another’s word for something they themselves did not check out. From both points of view!

I have had much proof of Gods existence in Science, Math, Geography, Even NASA believes in what the Bible says and used it to plan the first satellite launches. They still use that data today to plan orbital planning.

Scientist use the Bible, suppo...

Interesting video.

Many simply make comments due to ignorance, and that’s OK. The ignorant person is often the more intelligent person and can be taught, become smarter and more learned my mother often said. The stupid person on the other hand, remains the same, steadfastly refusing to learn, standing on their own understanding or even worst, taking another’s word for something they themselves did not check out. From both points of view!

I have had much proof of Gods existence in Science, Math, Geography, Even NASA believes in what the Bible says and used it to plan the first satellite launches. They still use that data today to plan orbital planning.

Scientist use the Bible, supposedly inspired by God to find things out that puzzle them. How did a man know 4,000 years ago that lightening goes from the ground to the sky first creating a path for the main bolt to come down to the ground. We didn’t learn that until the mid 70s using a super high speed camera to take a movie of it. But Job knew 4,000 years ago. Read it yourself.

Still the burden of proof lie within the person not other people One has to prove to themselves only for belief. How one believes depends on their experience, personal research, (or should) and not on what others say.

My mother had one of her doctorates in English literature specializing in ancient English. Elizabethan to be specific. She also had a doctorate in Metaphysics and was an ordained minister in the end. She got there by her own observation, experimentation, and research. Also she used the testimonies of others and many times documented their for them.

Her one truth she taught me was this. Many simply make comments due to ignorance, and that’s OK. The ignorant person is often the more intelligent person and can be taught, become smarter and more learned my mother often said. The stupid person on the other hand, remains the same, steadfastly refusing to learn, standing on their own understanding or even worst, takin

How did a man know 4,000 years ago that lightening goes from the ground to the sky first

Er... the aztecs created a pretty accurate calendar that took the earth's wobble into effect - does that mean that their god's were real then?

The egyptians built fantastic pyramids and had an understanding of neon lighting as well as batteries - did they get their science from their religion as well?

Or is it more likely that humans made discoveries, inventions, and wonderful works and then attributed those accomplishments to the gods that they created as a means to justify and reaffirm their beliefs. Any "science" in the bible reflects the knowlege that people had at the time. Acceptin...

How did a man know 4,000 years ago that lightening goes from the ground to the sky first

Er... the aztecs created a pretty accurate calendar that took the earth's wobble into effect - does that mean that their god's were real then?

The egyptians built fantastic pyramids and had an understanding of neon lighting as well as batteries - did they get their science from their religion as well?

Or is it more likely that humans made discoveries, inventions, and wonderful works and then attributed those accomplishments to the gods that they created as a means to justify and reaffirm their beliefs. Any "science" in the bible reflects the knowlege that people had at the time. Accepting that one would expect to find bad science in the bible because of mankinds early incorrect understandings of their world. If god were involved with the bible then one would expect the knowledge to be correct (in fact one would expect to find knowledge far beyond the capabilities of both bronze age tribes and modern day knowledge)

What we find is that the bible's science isn't exactly accurate. Pi does not equal 3, the earth is not a flat plate with 4 corners and a supported sky. Rabbits do not chew their cud. The stars are not fixed in the sky, the bat is not a bird, etc. These are mistakes made by primitive people with fledgling sciences - just what you'd expect.

btw, do you have any source or scripture for your lightning example? I couldn't find it and don't recall hearing that one before.