The burden of proof?

Question

I often hear Christians asking atheists "How do you know there isn't a God? Do you have any proof?"

Doesn't the burden of proof lie with the believer?

For example...let's just say that I claim that I can fly.
Should I ask you to prove that I cannot?
If I say that this avacado I just bought from the store can sing...
should I ask you to prove that it doesn't?
Wouldn't I be the one responsible for backing up my claims with undeniable proof?

Answer 1

If they slander you and call you evil and equivalent to a murderer, and you got hurt or killed for your 'sin', (for not believing their belief) I believe the law (secular law )would be more interested in facts than faith. That should be the test really. Does your faith stand up in court? I'd want to be pretty damned sure I was right when I was pubicly accusing someone of being as evil as a murderer or rapist. This doesn't seem to phase or trouble 'believers' who slander gays, other faiths, and non-believers in just this fashion. They don't care that the results of the slander and vilification accumulate and explode in the tyranny and killing of their targets.

So yes, the burden of proof lies with the believer, although they often feel vindicated enough to slander non-believers based upon their 'faith'.

It's a nasty mess. This World surely longs for freedom from religious and political fundamentalists.

Answer 2

The burden of proof lies on whoever makes the claim either side (Atheist in the does not or Theist in the does) but neither side is acheivable as God could never be proven or disproven.

Both the "God must exist because there is no proof he doesn't"and "God doesn'texist because there is no proof he does are logical fallicies.

And the level of proof always varies .In some cases a reversed burden of proof may be appropriate when two competing explanations (God/No God), can neither can be confirmed by observation. So no it is not like your avocado, because the avocado has physical parameters and characteristic that can be observed, so does singing.

So the whole prove and disprove God shows stupidity in whoever takes up either side of the argument.

Answer 3

It just depends on what you believe, really.

I have studied Philosophy, and my major in college was Religious Studies. I've also had one year of seminary.

I can tell you that what I've learned is that faith is only good when it doesn't have to be proven that it exists. This means that I don't need proof because I recognize that I have been born with an innate need for God. So I believe He exists.
If people NEED tangible proof, then they really aren't showing much faith, are they?

Faith is really a belief that is not based on proof. The Bible says we have to believe by faith and not by sight. Therefore, I believe that someone would have to come up with proof that God doesn't exist.

Soren Kierkegaard, a 19th Century Danish philosopher would ask, "what good is our faith if we must have proof?"
This would indicate that someone would have to come up with something tangible-something I could see, touch, smell, or whatever. To me that's impossible. Archaeologists have been trying to do it for years and can't.

Whatever you believe is up to you. That's why you have a brain-to think and ask questions. And when people are young, they are naturally on a spiritual journey to find something. But I found that hunger to be for God.

Good Luck to you in whatever you are searching for !

Answer 4

Christians don't need proof of existence of God so there is nothing we need to prove. They already believe in God. Atheists, on the other hand, don't believe in God and therefore they are the one looking for the proof providing they wish to change their views. If they're not interested in believing in a Supreme Being then they don't need proof either. So then Atheists don't have to ask questions about God. Just go on being non-believers as you are.

Answer 5

As a Christian, I believe many of my fellow believers feel the urge to convert and "witness" to non-believers. However, this type of logic is incorrect and very frustrating, as you have stated. You could just as easily ask them "How do you know there is a God? Do you have any proof?" Of course everyone is bound to believe that their personal beliefs are correct, otherwise, why would we believe them? I think a more rational and more enticing approach is to have a conversation where you actually ask the opinion of and try to understand, truly, the belief system of the other person. I don't believe in intimidating someone into a religion or into following your particular beliefs.

However, If you are interested in Christianity or in some sort of "proof" of a God, try reading "The Science of God" by Gerald Schroeder. I went through some questioning, myself (I think everyone does at some point), and it really helped. That book is really amazing and breaks the beliefs of Christianity down into scientific facts and explanations. It's pretty powerful. The writer is a graduate of MIT.

Answer 6

The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. If I said that you stole my bunny slippers, I would have to prove that you did. All that you would have to do is demonstrate reasonable doubt. Therefore if you claim that God does not exist, you are just as liable to show proof as the one that claims that God does exist. That said, neither of you will be able to prove that a God does or does not exists as it is a matter of faith which cannot be proven nor disproved. One can only chose to believe or not to believe. Faith is a matter of choice.

Answer 7

You are correct. A true Christian would use this opportunity to "witness" & explain God.

But then is it worth the battle? your definition of "spirituality" or "spirit" or simply "to create" may be different from mine.

A true Christian's proof is how they treat the Atheist; love them in spite of; pray for them in spite of; ask God for the wisdom to respond & not react so that the Atheist will not shut down because of offense but receive because of respect.

Yes the Christian should prove God exist, unfortunately the way to prove it is not visable or tangible, which is what most Atheist request as proof. You can't "see" that I have God in my heart....uh that would be murder. but you must be able to believe in the unseen in order to accept the true proof.

Answer 8

There is a great "Triumph the Comic Insult Dog" bit where he goes to a Star Wars movie premeire to make fun of all the nerd-fans in costume. He asks one guy dressed as a Jedi "what was the name of the material that Han Solo was frozen in?"

Without hesitation, Jedi Boy answers "Carbonite."

Triumph snaps back "Wrong, the answer is 'Who the @%!& Cares?'"

In matters of belief, be it singing angels or avacados, what is the purpose of demanding proof back & forth from either camp? Belief is not a physical act. Trying to prove belief is like tearing open your TV set to find the little people inside.

The fact that I believe what I believe without proof is, in fact, proof of my faith. That's all I can offer. I won't preach to you and you don't ask me to fly off your apartment building with you...deal?

Answer 9

i reckon atheism is a leap of faith as much as any religion. at some point it;'s as much of a stretch to accept that there is no god as to suggest that there is. both positions are equally up for debate. it's logically dubious to suggest that because "believers" believe in a god and the atheists believe in nothing, the believers have something to prove. ontological status has to be irrelevent (i.e. because theists claim something actually exists shouldnt make much difference), cos we're really talking about different systems of truth, one which leads people to believe in a god, and another which leads people to not believe in god, not actually talking about whtehr god exists or not. surely these systems are both open to doubt and therefore require proof of one sort or another.

think of it like this: so one person says i believe in god, one person says i believe in not god, they both make a leap of faith to believe, either in "god" or in "not god"

i asked a similar question and got flamed by loads of self righteous atheist fundamentalists. the only people who have no burden of proof are agnostics.

i'm a polytheist christian syndicalist by the way (with free scientologist leanings)

Answer 10

I am a Christian and believe in things that I cannot see but I know there is a God. I also know that He sent his only son to die for our sins. But the burden of proof lies with the believer. If you do not believe in God and Jesus ChRist then it is my job to convince you that he is real. How I can I do this? By my actions and by my attitude. You would eventually see that God is real. I do not hate or disrespect anyone whop does not agree with my beliefs. I