When atheists say there is no evidence of God, what criterion is used for determining "evidence"?

Answer 1

Something occuring that cannot be parsimoniously better explained via natural causes.

Something that is so clearly evidence that God (ANY GOD) intervenes in natural laws to achieve some end that indicates a conscious being who can communicate distinctly is doing the intervening.

And a willingness to do so on a regular basis, not just once every 2000 years.

Answer 2

Reason and logic to name two. As for the "criterion" that is used for determining evidence, well let's just say that the Bible is considered a book. If you want to prove his existence, we need something just a little more concrete.

Answer 3

Many self-described atheists share common skeptical concerns regarding supernatural claims, citing a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities. Other rationales for atheism range from the philosophical to the social to the historical. Although atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism, rationalism, and naturalism, there is no one ideology or set of behaviors that all atheists adhere to.

Part of the ambiguity and controversy involved in defining atheism arises from the similar ambiguity and controversy in defining words like deity and God. The plurality of wildly different conceptions of God and deities leads to differing ideas regarding what is entailed in atheism.

In contexts where theism is defined as the belief in a singular personal God, for example, people who believe in a variety of other deities may be classified as atheists, including deists and even polytheists. In the 20th century, this view has fallen into disfavor as theism has come to be understood as encompassing belief in all divinities, not just the Abrahamic one. However, in the Western world arguments against the Christian God often continue to be seen as arguments for atheism, because of the strong influence of traditional theological thought.

A problematic consequence of the broader redefinition of theism is that atheism can be seen as disbelief in almost anything; many pantheists, in particular, believe in a "God" that is synonymous with the natural world, which would make disbelieving in such a God result in disbelief in nature. Increasingly vague, abstract, or figurative conceptions of divinity have led some sources to circumvent the problem by defining atheism as disbelief in all "immaterial beings",rejection of the supernatural world altogether, or simply as irreligion. However, god-centered definitions of atheism remain more common.

Answer 4

Showing up like he used to do in the Bible. It would convert millions of Atheists. Doesn't God want that? What seems to be the problem?

Answer 5

Knowing that 5+5=11.

Answer 6

Proof of lack of evidence IS lack of evidence.

I'm pretty sure 'no evidence' means 'no evidence'. Consider these examples of similar logic.

No candy = no candy
zero dollars = zero dollars
1 = 1

Answer 7

Brendan G: I would add to your list, sadistic. Any god that would make someone fry like bacon for all eternity just because he or she did not believe in that god is a real sicko!
.

Answer 8

The same evidence as there is to say that the "aldsl;kaet" doesn't exist. There is no evidence that it does. It a lot more evidence then that God exists.

Answer 9

Same as it would be for any other hypothesis. Something that can be observed with one of the five well accepted senses.

Answer 10

We use the fact that no one has ever seen him
And therefore doesn't excist

something doesnt excist just becuase you say so.