>>19
Your starting premise that a deity would leave a definite mark is not axiomatic, nor can it be used to prove itself.
However, burden of proof does indeed lie upon religious claimants. Without any evidence of something's existence, it is clear that a.) it has had no effect or b.) we are ignorant of its effect. One can always plead Occam's Razor, citing the tremendous metaphysical baggage that comes along with any deity, but that's not a rigorous method. It's impossible to prove the nonexistence of something powerful enough to direct the entirety of existence at whim, and undetectably so. Yet, even if God came down from the Heavens and spake upon us His Glorious Word, one could still not be sure that there's nothing above
him. This is also applicable in that one can't be sure which Invisible Sky Magician is supposedly there.
Counter-evidence just sends ISM-ians off to cook up more excuses. "Oh, ISM enacts the physical laws himself"
Combine this with the very provable contradictions in the Bible, and the actions of any church, and you have yourself reason to disbelieve the whole mess.
/thread