Daily reminder that there is no evidential base for atheism

>no proof there is no God
>no proof Jesus didn't rise from the dead
>but then atheists turn around and apply empiricism to nonempirical questions
>claim that only empiricism matters, as if that in itself isn't a nonempirical statement
>being this intellectually lazy

*tips fedora*

>>no proof Jesus didn't rise from the dead

Even if he did, so what? Lazarus rose from the dead, Osiris rose from the dead, Castor and Pollux rose from the dead, granted it's a pretty amazing achievement but it doesn't mean you're the Creator of teh Universe.

These threads are just Atheists baiting other Atheists along with Christians.

>meh this story isn't very interesting
>what if... he is also the son of God!
>and and he also came back to life!

>>no proof Jesus didn't rise from the dead
... what? M8 I'm not even an atheist, and I find the whole "burden of proof" argument to be weak for atheism, but by GOD man this is literally one of the most obvious examples where the burden of proof IS ON THE FUCKING CHRISTIANS.

And as far as that burden goes, they've been pretty weak in delivering.

define "proof" and "evidential base"
hint: its not an a priori truth that jesus rose from the dead

>muh truth
untermensch when will they learn

Why did you leave /b/? Stop shitting up this board.

You can't conclusively prove a negative outside of pure logic, ergo the burden of proof is on the positive claim to prove the claim or provide a hypothesis for it if only for the purposes of facilitating the ability to have conversations about things.

Moreover the matter of god is not even just a lack of proof but a lack of a proper definitional grounding.

>it's this stupid fuck from /b/

>>no proof there is no God
>>no proof Jesus didn't rise from the dead
Theists are the ones making the claims, they are the ones that need to prove them. Especially with the latter claim.

A strong atheist makes the positive claim that god does not exist, so in that case the burden of proof is on them to justify that claim

Wait... this isn't /b/!

Jokes besides, someone could care to explain me why these (pasta) threads all use the same picture?

I'm not making any positive claims, I simply see no real evidence for the existence of any sort of deity or group of deities and thus do not believe they exist.

because her face is extremely annoying

Yes but an actual atheist DOES make a claim. Simply rejecting the positive claim of gods existence while not making a counter claim that he does not exist is agnosticism not atheism

Well that's an answer

>agnosticism
don't even try it here m8
Veeky Forums is largely convinced that agnosticism doesn't exist

Its because that girl makes a good upset pleading face that the original poster liked and all the people copying him since then have used it in reference to the first guy

tldr: its a meme you dip

And I care about this because...? Either you are claiming that god does not exist, or you are simply rejecting other peoples claims that he does. Labels aside, these are not the same philosophical position

just saying that for most ppl here both position are called atheism
and it pisses me off

(not the user you've been discussing earlier with)

Make sense

Fair enough. I dont actually care about labels, clarify the underlying point then argue that, calling it whatever you like. It saddens me how many arguments actually boil down to people using the same label for different things, or getting emotionally invested in using a specific label rather than another

So atheists, why don't you do this. Or could you reply to this?

I don't understand what makes you fixate on those things specifically

There's an infinite universe's worth of stuff we don't have proof didn't happen, what gives those particular ones more importance than others?

Reply to what exactly?

Ah! Don't act as if you don't understand

I really dont

>Veeky Forums is largely convinced that agnosticism doesn't exist
>Veeky Forums forms a consensus
Fuck off
>Le_western_dualistic_thinking.jpg

Fake

God is not exist. He was eaten by GodEater.NO Proof there is no godeater. NO Proff GodEater didn't eat God.

>Idiot: hay guys theres a god lol
>Atheist: uhhh, proof?
>Idiot: lol nah you proove there is no god lol atetism is a false religion

>Needing evidence for lack of a belief
Wew lad.

Havent i seen this thread in /pol/ before? Is there some autist who keeps making the same bait thread over and over?

So what?
Atheists really don't care.
Our lack of faith is our faith. Isn't that just so cool. We have the ability to believe in non belief. You simply drank the Kool Aid and never recovered.
(Did they kick you are your pic out of ?)

I hate to be impolite or unfriendly. But this is what happens in atheist threads. How. I really experienced some things that make it so.

So, ok. Anyone being atheist. Why not criticize Christianity for its mistakes? Why try to deny the existence of God while this is perfectly fundable to anyone honestly searching for this. And I don't mean on the basis of reasoning, words in any way!

I can mention this basic thing of mistakes in Christianity. Or maybe it would be an interesting point to discuss.

That's pretty metal desu.

>God doesn't exist is a positive claim
Learn what a negative claim is and why it applies to god not existing.

The counterclaim is a negative claim.