Piffle. That god just doesn’t go with inquisitions. I prefer a god with sable trim and little jangly blades hanging from the hem.
Got an answer?
Well, as long as the lady’s paying, why not take the vicuna?
In all fairness I am pretty drunk, but I laughed loudly for at least a minute! 
As to the OP: I sometimes say agnostic atheist, because I feel it is a little clearer about my position, which is: I have no need for that hypothesis.* I lack a belief, I am devoid of belief and I have no need for the hypothesis. The agnostic part only really comes in when someone presents me with the hypothesis. The rest of the time there is nothing. No need for belief, no need even for the hypothesis.
*Laplace, yes, well done you.
Depends. When the evidence required for X to be true is both absent and its existence pretty darn implausible to begin with, absence of X is not altogether illogical to infer. All the moreso when so many people have been actively and ardently looking for said evidence for so long.
In the context of Western faiths, it’s only *because *they thoroughly failed to produce such evidence and the counter-voice started gaining momentum that the faithful have (relatively recently) fallen back to the wonderful beauty of belief without evidence, god’s mysteries and all that tripe. Back in the day - and I mean the 2.000 BC day - Hebrews didn’t rely on blind faith : they basically dared their god to perform miracles just to show up the next tribe over. And he did.
Well, they wrote that he did, anyway ;). You know fanfic writers, always with the Mary Sues…
In a vacuum whether X is true or not doesn’t really matter, ultimately. It’s trivial to come up with any number of un-falsifiable assertions. If you’re allowed to include supernatural shit in your theory, the number grows by multiple orders of magnitude. But when you start telling people that they need to do this or that, not do this or that, think this way, dress this way, eat this way, not say that thing, make those things into laws - all on the basis of an assertion of X, then yeah, “you can’t prove !X !” doesn’t quite cut it any more. Especially when some dead German can do away with all of *your *proofs of X (and the notion that you could come up with one or obtain knowledge of X at all in the first place).
(general you, not RitteSport/**Voyager **you)
Well, I don’t think this one is number 1,000; I think this is actually much earlier in the list and it actually appears in your list above.
One of the big problems with the Christian artifacts is that they’ve been examined via rigorous scientific testing methods and proven to be false – mistakes at best, hoaxes at worst. In fact, Cecil had a recycled article about the Holy Shroud of Turin on the main page a few months back. [Despite the evidence, the truly faithful continue to believe and continue to pay homage to it in whatever manner is traditional.]
As I noted in a thread on another board (eons ago), the Shinto religion of the modern Japanese people (and their ancestors*) claims that the founder of their line of emperors – a line that has been unbroken since its initial establishment – was an earthly descendant of the top of their mythological pantheon: Amaterasu [OmiKami], the goddess of the sun. The first emperor of Japan, Jimmu Tenno, proved his lineage (and, therefore, his right to rule) by producing three artifacts that he inherited from the Sun Goddess herself: A sword, a cluster of jewels, and a mirror. Replicas of those artifacts are on display in a museum in Tokyo; the artifacts themselves are held in a secret place by the imperial family. The Japanese people do not challenge the authenticity of those artifacts (or the imperial reign).
Have any of the other 999 religions shown (and retained) artifacts that say,“Here’s my proof that backs my claim.” ?
We haven’t found The Grail, or the crown of thorns or Pontius Pilus’ spear and we don’t even know where to find them.
We know where to find the egg of Pan Ku – except that we’ve examined it and know it’s not like the myth describes it.
In contrast, we know where to find the sword, jewels, and mirror of Amaterasu. I’m inclined to believe that one before I believe the others.
–G!
*who, by the way, are not the original inhabitants of those islands
“They’re in a super secret place that only people who directly benefit from the belief people have in the existence of these items know about” isn’t a) knowing where to find them and b) proof of anything whatsoever. It’s a pretty transparent con, actually. Like my girlfriend who lives in Canada, so you can’t see her, but we totally did it and if you could ask her she’d tell you (but you can’t, she doesn’t have a phone or the internet).
There’s a place in Africa, Ethiopia I think, where there’s a small Orthodox Church nobody gets to enter, guarded by one guy. Only that guy and the head honcho of the Church get to go inside, and just before he dies he nominates a successor who gets to yadda yadda. They swear up and down that the Ark of the Covenant is in there. But you can’t see it, too holy for you. But it’s there.
A couple of years ago the patriarch of the Church said he’d show it to the public. Only the next day he basically said he’d changed his mind and wouldn’t, but vouched that it’s really there. The honest to HaShem Ark of the Covenant.
Now, do you really, *really *believe it is ? And what’s the difference between that and the Sword of Amaterasu ?
We had The True Cross, but Saladin took it away from the Crusaders at the Horns of Hattin.
The Ark of the Covenant is in New Mexico…I mean Ethiopia.
A nice Archdiocesan museum in Poznan, Poland, has the sword that Peter used to cut off the High Priest’s servant’s ear.
How could anyone doubt it! 
Actually, most of the time he didn’t, at least in the historical parts. But of course it was always our fault.