When atheists and theists debate the existence of gods, atheists generally ask for some sort of proof of the god or gods that the theist claims exist. Why do they do this? That is a difficult question to answer because while it is true that atheists often ask theists for proof that their god exists, sometimes they shouldn't. Asking for proof may end up confusing the important issues, causing distraction, and leading the conversation away from where it should be.
If that is the case, why do some atheists always ask for proof? I think that there are two reasons — one a question of semantics and one a question of principle. First, however, it would be easier to explain what atheists should be doing and why.
If a theist claims that a god exists, an atheist is justified in asking for that claim to be supported. Support is not the same as proof, although proof is a type of support (a very good type, in fact). Claims need to be supported if they are to be taken seriously.
2007-08-01 20:50:03 · 27 answers · asked by Jack Rivall 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
So why do atheists ask for proof? As stated above, one reason is semantic — it seems that, in some cases, it is simply an error in word choice. The atheist isn't really asking for an absolute, final and irrefutable case which demonstrates the existence of god, but is instead asking for good grounds for belief. The word "proof" is simply one which is commonly used and which comes out naturally. Debates about the existence of gods certainly isn't the only context where someone might use the term "proof" when they really mean "support."
There is one exception to this principle: asking for proof of a god is reasonable and justified if and when a theist suggests or even states outright that they have such proof. Sometimes this statement may be explicit and they'll use the word "proof," but other times it will implicit and they'll use words that merely imply that they have proof — words like "definite" or "undeniable." It isn't too common for a theist to go in this far, but when it does...
2007-08-01 20:50:46 · update #1
happen, then requesting that proof not only makes sense, but it's the right thing to do.
2007-08-01 20:51:00 · update #2
Any more Carl Sagan quotes?
2007-08-01 20:53:43 · update #3
You're right, that would be like a Christian asking an atheist to prove that God does not exist. Oh wait- that happens all the time on here! So, I'm going with answer C. Atheists ask Christians to prove that God exists to show how ludicrous it is to demand that atheists prove he doesn't.
2007-08-01 20:58:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
As an Atheist, I would always ask for proof in such a situation. I wouldn't just settle for 'support' either since that could be anything. I can support any view I wish by bending the truth in a certain way to suit my needs. Proof however, is reliable. If you can prove something, you can show it to be true. You simply cannot argue with the evidence/proof. Unless a theist was able to present some solid evidence to prove the existence of a god, why should anyone accept this? Also, what are the important issues that may be distracted from when the discussion turns to proof of existence? In a debate about the existence of gods, surely there is nothing more important to the debate... The fact that it is a very difficult question to answer is no excuse. Claims do indeed need to be supported if they are to be taken seriously. Claims ought to be proved if they are to be believed. I suggest that the argument in favour of the existence of a god fails on both counts.
2016-05-20 23:16:46 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem is that they don't believe the proof. The proof is in the Bible in the form of the prophesy of Jesus's birth and life. But, since they deny the Bible, then the proof is lost on them. Biblical manuscripts verify the Bibles authenticity as an ancient book, so I do not know how they can deny that the old testament predates Jesus. So, the question is how can you convince someone that refuses the facts.
2007-08-01 21:07:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would like the proof of existence, rather than hand-waving semantic support, thank you very much.
Esotericism is the meat and potatoes of a Christian's proof of god. Allowing unsubstantiated "support" will perpetuate the perception of a god.
2007-08-02 02:02:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
As someone who believes in God and evolution I often find myself on the "atheist"'s side of the argument despite my faith. From that point of view I know I become frustrated when the other party refutes the proof I present for my arguments by simply stating their belief in God as if that resolves the issue. I honestly believe that if the faithful would keep an open mind and ear to the evidence presented by atheists, even if they choose to ultimately reject it, atheists would not feel as compelled to ask for proof of God.
2007-08-01 21:50:14 · answer #5 · answered by Casey A 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I largely agree with you. I think "proof" belongs in the domain of mathematicians and logicians ("proof" is not even a common word among scientists).
What we should be talking about is "evidence" of Gods' existence. The fact that so many words are used so un-carefully on this forum (and among the lay public), e.g. "proof," "theory," "law, etc. only leads to further confusion among believers and non-believers alike.
Thank you for pointing this out.
2007-08-02 01:48:32 · answer #6 · answered by skeptic 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Myself, I don't need proof that God is or isn't. I know what I know and I need no one to convince me one way or the other of the existence of God. I know I like iced tea over hot tea. And nobody can convince otherwise. For one to ask for proof, is to be unsure of your beliefs. I know I am right in what I believe. I don't have to prove it to no one. All I ask of those that don't agree with me is not to judge me for thinking different from them. I don't think any less of those with different opinions than that of mine. Nor do I see myself as more intelligent. I see it in a very simple way. There are those who are auto mechanics. Does that make them more intelligent than me. No, it only means that they are more knowledgeable about cars than me. If I truly wanted to I too could know as much as that person about cars. I chose a to be an electrician.
2007-08-02 09:13:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not the job of Atheists to disprove, but it is the job of Christians to prove that the events stated in the Bible are true or at least have some historic background.
The job of an Atheist is to doubt and even when confronted with slander we will not stop because we wouldn't have evolved so far without doubt in everything.
2007-08-01 22:59:20 · answer #8 · answered by Michael 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In order to believe something one does have to provide proof. If you were told that the moon was made of cheese would you just accept it or would you want proof?
I have to ask for proof, I can not accept something is real if there is no proof to support it; or at the least plausible proof.
2007-08-02 00:25:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
facts without proof it piiisssses u off to hear people so ignorant and myopic so you say prove it. It's like a scientist claiming to cure aids with no proof. calling the unknown"god" is just a cop out remember the earth use to be flat
2007-08-01 21:00:20 · answer #10 · answered by otis spunkmeyer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋