That is for a discussion regarding God's existence, which this thread is not.
It is inextricorably linked. Discussion of atheism entails discussing why they think the way the do, which entails the very question of the existence of God.
God can not exist for an atheist, lest he wouldn't be an atheist. So the basic position of the atheist is that God does not exist. Even if you add... "unless God can be shown to exist"., still means that God does not exist (for the atheist). That is the position I am interested in.
You don't seem to be interested in it at all, as all you do is assert it over and over again, refusing to actually discuss what the atheist says. All you come back with is "because you are without God".
And you're again back to the whether God exists objectively or wholly subjectively.
I believe the Bible, or any other scripture is correct.
On what basis do you believe it correct? What experiences have you had that have led you to conclude that?
Subconsciously atheists affirm to themselves that there is no God. It is quite obvious, even though you will deny it, I'm sure.
It only seems obvious to you, Jan. To many of those that are actually atheist it is certainly not clear, precisely because it is not true about them.
But you fail to listen to them and ride roughshod over what they say with your "that's because God does not exist for you".
We've had years of this kind of communication. It is non productive because the atheist always wants to argue, exclusively from their own platform, which is God does not exist.
We have rarely had that kind of communication on this website. And both sides are as guilty of derailing threads, so please don't try and put theists on any pedestal from where they can cry victim! If you want to see why threads derail and are unproductive then you need look no further than your own responses, in this thread as well as any other you're involved in.
It obviously seems that way to you, because God doesn't exist as far as you're aware. But that is not the entire picture.
And back you resort to your seemingly default response. No effort to try and discuss, just what you think is a rebuttal to close it off. Discussion, my arse!
Read my response. If you think I am begging the question, explain.
See post #1658 where it was fully explained to you.
But to reiterate:
God is defined as that which gives rise to our ability to understand.
We understand.
This is therefore evidence of God.
This is begging the question.
Do you have any examples that do not beg the question.