> I seem to have made you angry. Not possible. > fallacy of thinking that the fact that "X does not exist" is not provable with the same finality as "X does e

> I seem to have made you angry. Not possible. > fallacy of thinking that the fact that "X does not exist" is not provable with the same finality as "X does exist" somehow means that "X does not exist" is not a question that is open to analysis on the basis of evidence and reason. What fallacy are you referring to? Please name it. In fact, this entire post, nearly every sentence, there is a lack of any actual identifiable reference to what you are referring. When you are trying to explain something, it helps immensely to be specific, as opposed to vaguely referring to some previous statement. > Note that you haven't asked at all what evidence and reasoning my conviction that the God of the bible does not exist is based on. Noted. But when someone or anyone makes a claim, the onus is upon them to support their claim. I am not responsible for your claims or your lack of support for your claims. > I'd be happy to discuss that evidence and weigh it against any evidence you're aware of for the contrary view. What was stopping you before? Look, I think you have it all figured out, and that's really all that matters. > your flawed reasoning above. I'd appreciate it if you would be specific. > Edit: It occurs to me that you haven't explicitly stated that the negative existential is the reason you consider the atheist position a claim to "know the unknowable". My claim, as always, is that atheists make the same exact mistake that deists make, which is that they both claim to know something, like knowing 2 + 3 = 5, that, in fact, they do not know that something, they merely believe it. It is belief, and belief is not knowledge, no matter how strong that belief is. Certainly, they have knowledge of their belief, and may think their belief is knowledge, but it is clearly not. You forgot your keys and you believe you left them on the coffee table, but that belief could be wrong. You may have left them on the counter. What is that "belief" when it is proven incorrect? One can not prove that 2 + 3 != 5, no matter how much it is believed. The best that could happen is to personally accept responsibility for the error, relinquish belief, which can be wrong and probably is wrong more often than not, and gain in its place actual genuine bone fide knowledge and awareness of the truth of the matter. And if the truth can not be revealed, then relinquish the possibility of knowledge, which is exactly what agnostics do, and they do know something. They know that they don't know, which is the most honest and most supportable position to have among the choices of atheism, deism, and agnosticism. If one is not aware of what one does not know, there are some serious problems.