In the debate of the existence of God, who has the burden or proof, the believer or the non-believer?

Question

Many times I have seen it debated about whether the burden of proof of God's existence lies with the believer or the non-believer. It is my opinion that the burden of proof lies with the believer and I think this comparison may help explain why:

In the United Stated Criminal Justice System, when a defendant is charged with a crime, he or she is considered "innocent until proven guilty". Meaning the allegations made against him or her are false until they are proven true. It is up to the defendent (and his or her attorney) to prove their proclaimed innocence.

I think this is comparable to the fact that when it comes to the existence of God, the burden of proof lies with the believer or the person making the claim that God exists. Like the defendent in the scenario above, the believer makes a claim that must be proven true or untrue and it is up to the believer the prove his or her claim or to prove that the allegations (that God does not exist) are false.

Answer 1

It's really not a simple question. Usually, it is the person making the claim. That person, in theological discussions, is typically the "believer" claiming that God exists.

However, in every day debates, the burden of proof often implicitly lies with the one challenging another's belief. So an atheist cannot (theoretically) initiate a debate with a theist by asking the theist to prove God.

It generally depends on the situation, but typically , the theist.

Answer 2

I am in partial agreement with you. However the word proof is actually impossible when talking about God. If we humans were able to grasp God with our limited minds then he would be less than God since by definition God is infinite and transcendant. So the word proof would be an unfair proposition. (I believe many believers have done an injustice to society by trying to wrap God up in a Christmas gift box with a bow tie and say here he is; in doing so you disrespect the question and He himself; there should be a certain degree of awe, mystery, humility, and even fear when talking about God who in no way can be fit into our minds) However I do think there should be some inductive evidence. Such as, if there were a God I would expect the universe to have a beginning, and not just a beginning but a beginning we have a hard time understanding that seems to go against the laws by which govern what we know as reality. I would also expect that the universe and life would appear designed as if to serve a purpose. The choice that is put out before us is whether we want to believe that something came from nothing or whether something came from Something. Another way to put it is that we have a choice between believing that intelligence came from Unintelligence or intelligence came from Intelligence. In our everyday lives, everything that we ever observe something never comes from nothing and intelligence always comes from intelligence. Religious atheist would have us to believe something we never witness; that random, unintelligence matter exploded and then a mindless force created a complex highly intelligent, intricate system. A system so complex and intricate that even us with intelligence can not match nor understand what random chaos has created. I choose to believe what I witness everyday, not something I've never witnessed. Not to mention once I really examined and looked at Jesus I had a real hard time turning my eyes away from him. Jesus is my real answer. He is the Divine Yes. Everything fades in comparison to Him.

Answer 3

Hi Christy,

You cannot use U.S. law as a basis for the spiritual world. First, it was not written for that use (of course) and second, it does not work. However, to answer your original question, the burden of proof lies with neither the believer nor the non-believer. The burden of proof lies with God Himself. God said, and I quote,

"Remember the former things of old, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, saying, 'My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure,'" Isaiah 46:9-10

So, not only does God say that He is the ONLY living and true God, He challenges all other holy books and prophets to bring their own "burden of proof" by declaring what takes place in the future as if it had already happened. Only God can prophecy (history told in advance) and only those speaking from God Himself could do so.

"Let them bring forth and show us what will happen; let them show the former things, what they were, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare to us things to come. Show the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods; yes, do good or do evil, that we may be dismayed and see it together." - Isaiah 41:22-23

So the burden of proof lies on the one that claims the position of God. If the Bible is God's Word, then prophecy will be 100%--and there is an extreme amount of proof for that.
http://www.schneblin.com/studies/pdfs/in_the_volume_of_the_book.pdf
http://www.schneblin.com/studies/pdfs/literal_fulfillment.pdf
http://www.schneblin.com/studies/pdfs/seventieth_week_of_daniel.pdf

All other writings, books or apocryphal writings do not have prophecy to prove its origin. And God has placed the burden of proof on Himself, and has challenged others with it as well. And from my 37 years of studying the Bible, I have found that not only does He exist, but that the Bible is indeed His Word and that all other books are left wanting.

Answer 4

In science, the burden of proof rests with the one making the positive claim, i.e. I say X exists, then I damn well better bring proof/evidence of that.

It is trivial to understand why this is so: I cannot conclusively prove that invisible purple dragons do not exist. But all of us would demand evidence of someone claiming they do exist.

Answer 5

We will all find out whether God exists when we die and meet Him. God does not require that we prove or disprove Him. He requires that we come to Him in faith... which means we accept Him without proof.

Proof comes later. The Bible states that "Signs SHALL follow them that believe". Personally I have found this to be true, and know of many other sound minded individuals who likewise have experienced signs. Signs as in seeing angels, instant healings, prophecy, direct revelation from God etc. God is not dead not does He change, what He has done in times past He does today.

Yet these signs are only given to the believer, not the disbeliever. While I can witness to you of my experiences, you will only have my testimony, not my experience.

I cannot prove to you God exists, I can only testify. I don't even think God wants me to try to prove to you He exists, He wants you to find that out for yourself.

I am not sure why God requires we come to Him with faith first. Why that requirement? Are the wonders of nature signs enough? The mere fact that we exist? Is God so great and divine that He feels it justified to make this requirement? I am not sure why. I just know that is His requirement.

One thing I do know... I am not a believer in Christ anymore... I am a knower. Belief means you accept Him and His teachings on faith, not knowing whether He is real or not. Once you experience mighty miracles, then you become a knower and are more accountable. If you want to become a knower for yourself... you will have to reach out in faith with all your heart and be willing to do whatever He commands you. That is far deeper than just going to church on Sundays.

Answer 6

I think the person COMMENCING the discussion has a responsibility of showing what evidence he has for the point of view he is promoting, he should explain how he arrived at his conclusions and why he thinks his point of view is superior to yours.

All to often someone commences a question with "The Bible is a myth" or "Jesus wasn't a real historical person" or "God does not exist" but then fail to show why they believe that to be the case and they put all the burden of refuting their claim on the reader.

Seems dishonest to me. They should make their case rather than just putting sweeping unsubstantiated assertions out there.

Answer 7

I like your logic...and would say that if *anybody* has the burden of proof, it would be the believer.

However, in reality...neither has the "burden of proof".

The "burden" of a believer is simply to proclaim the Word of God...the Gospel...to the ends of the earth. They are said to be "planting seeds", which means sharing the Word. But it is GOD who gives the growth!

We simply warn; that is all. See Ezekiel 3:17-21.

By no means do we have the "burden" to "prove" that God exists...though, this is evident by the things we see.

...but to say that the believer has the burden of proof to prove that God exists is insane! God alone can reveal Himself; we have no power over Him, as if we were God!

-
But even more pointedly, not even God HIMSELF has the burden of proof!!!

He has absolutely no obligation to anyone! Period!
He is God!

Numerous times, people came to Jesus and said, "Show us a sign...to prove You are who You say You are..."

And time and time again, Jesus said, "No sign shall be given...except the sign of Jonah"

In other words, He would not "prove" that He was God...although the miracles He performed should have been enough! (And for many, the miracles WERE enough). But the ultimate "proof" He provided was "the sign of Jonah". In other words, His physical resurrection from the dead. Just as Jonah spent 3 days in the belly of a large fish and then came back, Jesus spent 3 days in the "belly of the earth" (that is, dead) and then came back.

HOWEVER,
In the end analysis...Jesus said time and time again:
"IF you would believe, THEN you would see."

But atheists say time and time again:
"IF I would see, THEN I would believe."

Surely, you can see the Catch-22...?

Thus, the atheist is doomed to never witness a miracle or the power of God...never to see "proof"...and never to believe.

If, however...they were to repent and believe...THEN they would witness the power of God...and THEN they would see "proof".

-
And though God and His Word testify to the truth of these things (a far greater testimony), I will also testify to the truth of these things...

For over 2 decades, I never witnessed the power of God...and desired to see the power of God in order to believe. Eventually, I became an atheist.

Later, I sat down to read the Bible to prove it wrong...and after reading Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John...I believed!

And already believing...it was THEN that I saw proof of the power of God. Ironically, I suppose you could say, I no longer needed this "proof" in order to believe...for I already believed. But this is the problem with a Catch-22, isn't it...?

There are RARE exceptions to this Catch-22, like doubting Thomas (displaying and glorifying His grace all the more)...but for the most part...it holds true. This means if atheists keep a hardened heart, God will yet harden it all the more...to their own destruction.

-

May the Lord opoen the eyes of all who read these words...and be merciful and gracious unto you!

-

Answer 8

I agree. The only reason non-believers say God is not real is that believers say he is. At the risk of sounding childish, the believers started it. Therefore, the burden of proof rests with them.

Answer 9

it lies with the first control freak who cant handel someone else not thinking exactly like him. So the first one who cant live and let live. The first one to start the debate there the ones with the burden of proof.
Just one more religios war in a whole line of them and we dont have time for this anymore.

Answer 10

This is a highly debatable question.
Why do you believe in god? -because you were raised to.
If you weren't told of 'God' would you know/think he EVER existed? -Possibly not.
Think about heaven and hell for a second. A lot of people associate hell with: pain, fire, ect. Well, all of those are things that can happen here on Earth.
Now, think of heaven. Most people associate heaven with: wealth, streets of gold, pearl gates; the stuff people here on Earth would want.

It really is an opinion if god ever existed or not, because there is no SOLID proof that he did.