Atheist's thinking:
If God exists there would be convincing proofs of his existence. There are no convincing proofs of his existence. Therefore God does not exist.

Premise: If God exists there would be convincing proofs of his existence.
Response: This is not a logical necessity. To say that there would be convincing proofs of his existence is an unfounded statement. If God exists, he may or may not choose to provide sufficient proof for his existence.
The Bible teaches us that God works through people and history and that there is evidence for his existence. But, people dispose of the evidence due to the hardness of their hearts, i.e., their presuppositions that negate God's existence.

It may also be that there are convincing proofs of his existence but people choose to ignore them or explain them away or are not aware of them. The premise admits the possibility of proofs of God's existence. But since all proofs cannot be known by any one person, it is possible that there are proofs that exist that are not known.


Premise: There are no convincing proofs of his existence.
Response: This is an opinion since the word "convincing" is included. For some, there is convincing proof of God's existence. That is why this is a subjective statement, an opinion. Because it is subjective it is not a proof.


Premise: Therefore God does not exist.
Response: Therefore, because of the subjective nature of the alleged proof, this attempt does not disprove God's existence.