Bwild: [ I'm not an atheist. ] ~ Prove it.

"Iamon lyme: its really the other way around."

Do you mean it's up to me to prove he is? Or did you mean something else?

He made the statement that he is not an atheist. That's fine, but so far he hasn't said anything that would make me believe that he isn't. It can't be the other way around because it's not up to me to back up or disprove his statement. Based on everything I've seen him say up to this point I believe he is an atheist, so it's puzzling that he would say that he isn't and then act as though that's all that needs to be said.

If a duck told me he is not a duck, I'm not going to believe him unless he can back up that claim with something (anything) resembling evidence of him not being a duck. It's as simple as proving (demonstrating) that he is actually some other kind of bird.

If he can tell me about the god or gods he truly believes exist then okay, he's not an atheist.

And if he doesn't want to tell me, then that is okay too. But the only way someone can back up the statement he is not an atheist is to demonstrate some kind of belief in a god or gods. And I don't mean some high ideal or fuzzy idea about the universe, or some cheap workaround about how he is the god that he worships, and therefore he cannot be an atheist.

The guy can build his own computer, but he can't explain why he isn't an atheist? I'm not interested in playing word games with him, and I assume his grasp of the English language is adequate... but maybe that's where I've made my mistake, maybe I've assumed too much. How hard can this be?