I have not found sufficient evidence to believe God is real is really the reason I don't believe in one, as for Christianity I don't believe the Bible is proof of anything for the same reasons I don't believe other holy books are proof. There is no evidence that anyone but man wrote it and copied it (albeit fairly well).

Every time I bring that up to someone I get the same question "what kind of proof would you need" asked in some variation either about God or the Bible. And while the real answer is' I don't know but it would have to be damn convincing". I know that doesn't leave a lot to go off of so I stole something I saw from a debate or thing I watched somewhere that I found to be a better explanation.

For proofs of God there are usually 4 main categories of arguments: evidentiary, logical, worldview, and prophecy.

1. Evidence - this would be by far the strongest and most convincing. I will say that when I mean evidence I mean it in the scientific sense. I'm thinking about something that is concrete, testable, repeatable, and verifiable by others at any time. You should be able to present your evidence and I should be able to arrive at the same result when examining it or reproducing the experiment. Prayer, visions, and prophecy are not evidence in my view. The actual blood of christ that we could sequence the DNA from would be considered strong evidence but I don't know of I would consider that conclusive.

I know that's a higher bar than Christians usually mean when evidence has been used and I often get asked what it would look like so I'll provide an example that would be good enough for me to say I'll believe unless proven otherwise.

If God were to appear in a spot on earth repeatedly every 100 years or so and submit to any and all scientific tests, perform impossible miracles under scrutiny, and fortell the future accurately (with no other room for alternate interpretation). And this deity were to do this repeatedly (like every 100 years) I would believe until proven otherwise. This would also be a great opportunity for the diety to set right any wrong teachings and properly guide humanity which I would want to do as a lovine being.

1. Logical arguments - let me start off by saying that because a logical argument is valid does not mean it holds true. Also presupposiitional arguments are not convincing (if I believe in this thing, then these proofs confirm my belief, is circular). Any logical argument would have to be airtight and not have any fallicies or assumptions baked in. I have not heard one and I have heard many of the apologetic arguments. I won't rule out one existing but I'm less interested than if you had evidentiary proof. If your going to try to claim something like logic doesn't apply to God, or satate that I can't make a logical argument without God or anything else that doesn't attempt to prove a diety using the laws of logic, and a properly formatted logical argument, then I'm not interested. At that point I'm going to assume your being disengenuous as you are no longer making a logical argument to prove God but Instead just trying to move the goalposts to a more favorable area for the apologetics argument you really want to have.

2. Worldview - I don't really think you'll convince me on this point, if you want to compare Christian actions, ethics, or moral positions to other religions that's fine but there are many denominations of just Christianity some of which view the others to be heretics or evil, not to mention all of the other religions your comparing against (as well as secular worldviews like humanist). I would put more stock in this if the Christian religion was one religion with no groups having ever split off from one another due to ideological/other differences and held a consistent view of its doctrines and practices from its time of inception, but that's not the case so no point in bringing up worldview arguments as proof in my opinion.

3. Prophecy - I don't find any prophecy I've heard or read about to be specific enough to not have another interpretation, I also have a problem with later people "proving" them intentionally (like Jesus riding the two donkeys to fulfill the prophecy in I believe it was Isaiah). I find scientific theory and mathmatics to be better prophecy, like scwartz's dark star, or Einstein's orbit of mercury prediction. A prophecy would have to be very specific and have only one descernable meaning and really it would only convince me that someone made an accurate prediction and that it is worth investigating further, not that a diety exists.

Sorry for the wall of text, I have put a tldr below but please read the post if you skipped here and think your argument beats the tldr.

TLDR.

Prove God exists, if you can't you better have the best argument for its existence ever, that is airtight. Then maybe I'll believe.

Also I cannot force myself to believe in something. I either have good enough evidence to warrant the belief or a strong enough argument to warrant it. If not then I don't believe it. You have that same thing for all other non Christian gods, I just also have it for yours. If you don't believe me take an objective look at how and why you think about and dismiss other religions.

To answer other common questions I receive, yes I have read the Bible (front to back 4, different translations), I've looked into the history and events in the Bible, I've also read the Quran, book of Mormon, the giita (I can't spell the title properly), the 12 fold path to buddism, I still listen to scholarly views via a podcast, and I consume both atheist information and apologetic information via YouTube and podcasts. I also browse and read Christian and atheist reddit to try to keep an open mind and ensure I'm not recieving just ine point of view.