“I’ve noticed that Atheists like to play the “prove it” game. They use this game to shift the burden of spiritual responsibility to God off of themselves, trying to replace it with a burden of proof for the Christian. ”

This bit of nonsense came from this blog.   Christians often don’t think their arguments through.

we can have this by just changing a couple of words:  “I’ve noticed that Christians like to play the “prove it” game. They use this game to shift the burden of spiritual responsibility to Ahura Mazda off of themselves, trying to replace it with a burden of proof for the believers.” This, of course, can have any other god put in place of Jason’s personal version of the Christian god, even other versions of the Christian god.

He goes on “God has proven Jesus is our Lord and Savior to everyone who hears the Gospel:”   Hmmm, I’ve heard the gospel and nothing was proven to me.  What the gospels, and the rest of the bible, happen to be are claims, not proof.  A book that says it is true is not evidence for that book being true.   Other holy books make the same claim and gosh, Jason, doesn’t blindly believe them.  Tsk.

Then we have this “Because let’s be honest, there is no naturalistic argument that proves Jesus rose from the dead. At best the historical evidence shows that the resurrection of Christ is more likely than not, but this does not meet the standard of proof the Atheist is asking for. God will never allow a naturalistic argument to prove the resurrection of Jesus, because then people would not have to turn to God from their heart. ”

Hmmm, other Christians say that this god does want a naturalistic argument. Such a shame, contradicting Christians.  At least Jason admits that his nonsense is just as silly as any other religions, and that he must make baseless claims for it too.  The historical evidence shows that the resurrection of Christ is not likely, though there might be some evidence for a crazy Jew who thought he was the messiah, not what Jason claims to worship.

Poor Jason, he whines about evidence, but then demands the same thing from other religions he doesn’t believe in.

“I could close this post out with links to articles or videos presenting the historical evidence for the resurrection of Christ, but I’m not going to do that. ”

He doesn’t do that because he knows they fail and he doesn’t want to be held responsible for failed arguments.   Such a coward, he wants to address atheists, but is too afraid of having comments where they can reply to him.   Yet one more failed apologist for this god which points to two possibilities:

This god needs a better HR staff.
This god is imaginary.