Atheism is based on ignorance

For this debate, I will fulfill my burden of proof by showing how atheism is based on ignorance rather than on knowledge and evidence most of the time. First, you commit the fallacy of circular reasoning (1). 1. I claimed atheists reject God 2. You claim atheists do not accept God because of the lack of evidence You created an inconsistent analogy. I will explain : 1. There must be evidence for God to believe 2. Evidence requires natural observations 3. God is beyond natural and cannot be seen while unicorns can that being said, there cannot be scientific evidence for God and he is beyond science and nature. Science does not concern itself with God (2). We can hypothetically prove unicorns exist because they are material. it doesn't mean that he doesn't exist since he is logically and philosophically able to interact with the world. in these respects, atheism is not knowledgeable of how science and God works as people constrict everything to evidence. 2. You claim it's biased, but has no relevance to what is being observed. 3. Being consistent with the Bible is being accurate. 4. The Hebrew word for hosts is tsaba which speaks of an army (3). Heaven is shamayim which is made of the atmosphere, space, planets, and stars (4). Thus from the ancient Hebrew, it is stars. "Uh, no. The Westboro Baptist church follows the Bible better than you. You can't deny that they're getting their morality from scripture, which shows that this book can be interpreted in a way which gives people obviously incorrect moral codes" You commit the fallacy of rhetorical question in asking " If god really wrote this, why would he be so mystical about it and leave things up for interpretation?" (5). The WestBro Baptist church does not get their morality from Scripture (John 3:16 clearly refutes their teaching that God "hates the world." Once again, you commit the fallacy of rhetorical question asking "I'd say going to hell is worse than being murdered, wouldn't you?". You go to hell because you refuse to have faith in Jesus (John 3:18). you also go to hell because you have not received Jesus (Rev. 21:8). Pharaoh hardened his own heart and thus refused to let God's people go (Ex. 5:1-2). The point is that we are morally responsible for our own actions. The phrase baldhead in the near east meant that they wanted him dead, so God obviously had to protect him (6). " You choose not to put homosexuals to death (Leviticus 20;27) and to wear mixed fabrics (Deuteronomy 22:11) because you're only following the moral parts of the Bible you agree with" I would give a thorough explanation if I had the time, but for now I will only explain it briefly. Leviticus is a book centered around the rules and regulations to the holiness of Israel. Though the law of moses came death, but through Jesus came grace and forgiveness of sins (John 1:17, Romans 4:15). As for the fabrics, it also has been fulfilled in Jesus (Gal. 3:24-26). You claim there are contradictions then say that it's all "semantical arguments." You commit the fallacy of incredulity in saying " I find this ridiculous, as if you replace "calamity" with "natural disasters",the passage does not make sense" (7). You failed to show that there are contradictions. "If god says "Don't kill", then kills people, is that not hypocritical?" That seems to be a personal attack against God, but ok. Your misusing terms. That commandment in Hebrew is actually ratsach or murder (8). Show me one verse where God uses that same term and maybe you will present a better argument. "Next you quote experts who say the Bible is factual, which I also don't see as relevant. How is that related to creationists having the BoP to prove God? " I did not say "God works in mysterious ways", but ok 1. You imply Christians are creationists " " 2. I'm a Christian, but not a creationist 3. Your conclusion is wrong You commit the fallacy of one-sided assessment implicitly "just because experts say something does not mean" (9). "I find this exasperating as it is quite an easy concept to grasp, yet so many creationists cannot grasp it" "We look at your silly hypothesis.." You now commit the fallacy of ad hominem or personal attacks (10). You revert back to circular reasoning. "I never claimed all Christians indoctrinate, I said most do. I don't talk about atheist indoctrination because it happens far, far less than Christian or Muslim indoctrination." You brought no evidence that Atheism is an exception to indoctrination. You also seem to make a generalization supporting your view of what an atheist is. "So if you don't want to give evidence that god exists, why do you attack atheists for not believing in god when you give us no evidence he exists?" I conclude with this: You have failed to provide evidence and sources supporting your cases against God. You fail to demonstrate knowledge from the ancient world to better grasp the concept of the Bible and strongly attack it. You only rely on reason and logical arguments that have already been used (problem of evil, etc.). As we have seen, while i'm speaking of experience (not delving into the field of evidence), this is typically the case with atheism. I'm sure there are very smart atheists out there, but so far, these are the tactics they use. With that in mind, i rest my case that atheism is based on ignorance. Sources: 1. http://www.fallacyfiles.org... 2. http://powertochange.com... 3. http://biblehub.com... 4. http://www.bibletools.org... 5. http://www.fallacyfiles.org... 6. Jamieson, R., Fausset, A., & and Brown, D. (1997). Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (electronic ed.) 7. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com... 8. http://en.wikipedia.org... 9. http://www.fallacyfiles.org... 10. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...