[Reverence]

I have heard things, fallacious things.

People have said that if you cannot disprove God, that means you cannot disprove religion, but this my friends, is only an exaggeration.

Let's settle this, here and now!

Point One:
The main arguments against the existence of God are based upon the inconsistency of the religion itself. If the arguer's goal is to prove their religion is right by proving the existence of God, they have pretty much already lost, so debating with them is baseless. I will explain later to those who don't get it.

Point Two:
If you successfully point out a contradiction, anomaly, or fallacy in a certain religion aimed to disprove God, you have failed. An inconsistency in a religion does not disprove God in anyway, it only proves that the interpretation of God in that religion's perspective is false. You cannot disprove nor prove the existence of God, therefore you might as well not argue. However, you can still attempt to poke holes in religion, this just shows how corrupt the believers of it are.

Spoiler: <span style="color: #FF1493;" class="mycode_color">Explanations</span>

Explanation One:

Religion created God, you cannot prove God to exist without first proving the religion to be consistent. So if you cannot keep a consistent religion, don't take the bigger step and debate the existence of God. If you somehow manage to prove that God does in fact exist, you still have not proven your religion to be correct, because you still didn't sort out the contradictions.

Explanation Two:

As said, if you find an error in a religion, you cannot use that to disprove God. For example if you use the "Argument from Evil" in attempt to disprove God, you only disproved the religion's perspective of God.

[Reverence]

ooh, I do this one every day...pretty much.

I think one of the major fallacies in arguing FOR the presence of god is circular logic, but it's also the same for one of the most popular "can you prove it? then it doesn't exist" argument.

I personally say that there is no god because I have heard "if you believe, then he exists" and "you can't prove he's NOT there" even though it's rather plain to see that people like westboro baptist church seem to say that god hates everything even though that's not in the bible.

oh dear, I rambled...main point: Circular logic works because circular logic works.

They have the burden of proof, they are the ones making claims, we don't have to prove that he does not exist.

I say I can fly, you tell me I'll believe you if you prove it. I say prove to me that I can't fly. That's simply flawed, you cannot make claims and tell others to prove you wrong, or you're right.

[Coder-san]

I have nothing against religion, but I hate it when they claim that carbon-dating is bogus and there were no dinosaurs, and that the world was "made" last night by their imaginary friend.
It's like a blind guy telling you that you can't see correctly and what you see is false.