Correct! The demons have more sense than the atheists. The demons know that God exists and they know their ultimate fate and they shudder and tremble at the thought of it.
YOU do not KNOW that any gods exist.
Correction! We do not know that anything DOES NOT exist. One of the great philosophical problems is how to disprove something's existence.
The only way that seems to work is when a group tells you up and down that something exists, they have a clear secret agenda, and if pressured at gunpoint they admit the deception.
Btw, this does not work for Christianity. Christians often give up a high-paying job to follow Jesus, sometimes being tortured or killed (this tends to happen in less developed countries). What is the hidden agenda, where is the hard sell, and where is the sudden admission of falsehood?
We do have proof that God or gods exist.
It's like this, there is proof of God's existence immediately, in the same way there's proof of civilization. It would be far more difficult to say civilization (or God) does not exist as you would have to disprove everything to the contrary. For example, just to name one, how do you exist. Or here's another, unlike many theists, I don't object to evolution. What is involved in making a species that evolves? Quite a bit actually.
Jesus says this bizarre saying about exorcising a spirit, having a house swept clean, and having a bunch of evil spirits move in. This is particularly strange until you understand that atheists are the clean-swept house. And like the house evil visitors tell them lies about God. The demons possessing an atheist tell them such things are superstitions of the past. But the cognitive dissonance is a pretty clear sign of mental confusion.
Asserting a God exists is like asserting the sky is blue. You do not need to prove this because it is self-evident.
God is creator of the universe, according to religious text. Universe exists? Don't need to prove this.
God is creator of nature, according to religious text. Nature exists? Don't need to prove this.
Why not? Because these are definitional. God = creator of (whatever)
What burden of proof there may be involved is "Was God the creator, or was it someone else?" But you see, I do not care about this. If someone or something is the creator of such things, I shall call that person, force, or concept God. Even if such is actually more like the Force.
But, you say, "the universe doesn't require a creator." That assertion requires burden of proof.
You see this?
This is called a chair.
If you can prove to me that an item, any item, can spontaneously be created, then I see no reason not to accept this bullshit assertion that the universe doesn't require a creator. Until that is the case, nope, you don't get to pass the buck. This chair is made by DutchCrafters.
While you are correct in stating an agnostic position (we do not know whether it was a classically defined deity, or something entirely different), we do know that whatever cause is responsible for creation of nature or the universe is in fact responsible. There is no such thing as uncaused creation.