An atheist doesn't need to "prove" that there is no god. An atheist does not need to provide any evidence that there is no god. The proposition that gods exist is advanced by those who therefore assume the burden of proof. Frank finds it convenient to suggest that most atheists are explicit atheists, insisting that there is no god, and therefore assuming a burden of proof. Frank assumes that because it's convenient for his smug and silly epistemological position. My experience of atheists is that far and away, they are implicit atheists of "don't know, don't care, ain't important" school of thought. I've met a handful of explicit atheists in my life, i've met literally hundreds, and possibly thousands of implicit atheists. (I say possibly thousands because of the many hundreds of people i've met who complain about organized religion, but with whom i've not discussed whether or not there is a god--i don't bring it up because it doesn't interest me, and if they don't, then there it lies.) Frank's assumptions and contentions regarding atheists are merely convenient to the superior position he claims for himself, a position which exists only in his own mind.
EDIT: Addendum--there is almost no way at all to determine how many atheists there are in the world, let alone distinguish between explicit and implicit atheists. Loud-mouthed, militant, explicit atheists only seem to predominate on the squeaky wheel principle, and are alleged by those who want to shout back, touting the excellence of their own understanding.
I knew you'd never be able to resist. Saint Frank, the epistemological giant. How do you "know" any of those snide accusations you made about my life? Since, in fact, you know nothing about me or my life, you are by your own criterion displaying weakness. To claim to know what you do not know, according to your idiotic signature line, is a sign of weakness.
I guess you must be a weak man, Saint Frank. This is all, of course, part and parcel of your inability to defend positions you take. You trot out the sneers and the snide remarks because you lack the rhetorical skills, the logic and the intelligence to defend the silly claims you make.
Clever? Ha! You couldn't "clever" your way out of a wet paper bag.
I believe the experience is real. We would disagree as to interpretation, so it depends how he lives with the experience. If it is important to the person to never be contradicted, said person would be wise to avoid gatherings where doubters and unbelievers discuss/argue such things. I for one can let him have his belief, uncontested, so long as it is not insisted upon that I must share the belief. Looking at it from my side, I have one sister, whom I love. But, on facebook, she constantly posts articles insulting to atheists. Not arguments or calls for dialog. Hateful put-downs. I try to ignore it, but occasionally have to speak up, merely to remind her who one of those hated atheists happens to be
For me anyway.
