Photo Attribution: Main121 (public domain)
Rule It Out First
There’s an interesting sentiment that I hear on occasion when conversing with atheists about God. I’ve been informed that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. I admit that it seems to be convincing, but only to those that have no training in formal logic. After all, if there’s no evidence for God (in the form of tangibility -usually the type requested by atheists) then this absence seems to be a blow to his existence. Right? Not exactly. We’re going to examine the modus tollens argument (Latin; the way that denies by denying) to see if this type of reasoning is valid or not. The argument goes like this:
Photo Attribution: Wikipedia
On The March
As time goes on there seems to be an ever growing number of militant atheists that are on the march against God and religion. Though I feel this article could be directed at atheism as a whole (at least on some level) but I’m specifically addressing these militant types for today. Some of you may be wondering what I mean by “militant atheist”. I’m speaking of those that are hateful, obnoxious, rude, quick to judge and call names etc. Here’s a passage that sums it up: This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God. 
Description: This seems to be a trend where atheists use the “cruel God” of the Old Testament in a cumulative case to show that that God couldn’t possibly exist. I have had atheists flat out tell me that these “atrocities” prove that he is not real…their words, not mine.
Photo Attribution: Wikipedia
Close Minded Yet Open Skepticism
I frequently hear Atheists proclaim how they are free thinkers and those of faith are just drones, bound to the close mindedness of religion. Though I will concede to their point to an extent -as I have heard Theists of all kinds blindly spewing regurgitated information (even data that’s been adequately refuted) with adamant dogmatism- however this broad paintbrush stroke is not warranted as a whole. I’m not writing today to prove if Theism, and more specifically Christianity, is open or closed minded but I’m here to show that Atheists are not quite the free thinkers they “think” they are.
Description: Blame is the name, but it’s a non sequitur complaint.
Description: I would like the Atheists out there to define what they would accept as evidence for God. Different people have different opinions and criteria for evidence. So, I would like to hear those different ideas.
What Is A Belief System?
In the endless debate between Christians and Atheists, there arises familiar arguments on both sides on why God exists or why he doesn’t, as well as how to approach life based on each worldview. On the Christian side, we accept that our system of beliefs are a faith but to the common Atheist, he/she rejects that theirs is a faith or system of any kind; just simply a negation or a lack of belief. Some will wager, that, a negative stance is a mere absence of belief, but is that absence of belief void of any belief against its opponent? No it is not. Consider the “Straight Edge” subculture which are opponents of the hedonistic adherents of punk rock. The Straight Edge lifestyle in general “is a philosophy of staying clean and sober: meaning refraining from using alcohol, tobacco, and any other recreational drugs.”  They believe that the hedonist Punk Rockers are wrong in what they do. They believe that not drinking at all makes for a better/healthier lifestyle etc. This philosophy can apply to many groups indeed -as it is not exclusive to one group- but the “Straight Edgers” are also a particular subculture aimed at another (like Atheism is to Deism/Theism). Their sole basis and founding is built off a negative to combat a positive affirmation of belief.