I can reply to that question in two ways, and either of them is enough.
1- I don’t have to.
You’ve probably heard the term “burden of proof” before. In this context, it works like this: when someone makes a new claim, it’s his responsibility to prove it, or at least provide some evidence for it, instead of someone else having to disprove it. In other words, the burden of proof is on the side of those who make the claim — especially if it’s a bold or uncommon one.
Imagine someone accuses you of being an alien disguised as a human. Would you feel that you have an obligation to prove that you’re a real human? Of course not. It’s the other person who has to provide evidence for their claims.
It works that way, too, for claims like “there is a god, and he’s exactly like I believe he is”. The one who makes the claim has the burden of proof. A question such as “can you prove that it didn’t happen?” only works in Ed Wood movies.
2- Can you prove X doesn’t exist, then?
Another way to counter the “you can’t prove God doesn’t exist” claim is to ask the same question back at you. Can you prove Zeus doesn’t exist? Aphrodite? Odin? Thor? Allah? Kali? Nanabozho?
You’ll have to admit that you can’t. In fact, you could dedicate the rest of your life to proving that any of them doesn’t exist, and you’d fail miserably. I’ll assume, then, that you believe all of them are likely to exist, right?
No? Why not, then? Believing in one god because you can’t prove he doesn’t exist, but not applying the same logic to all the other gods, is a classic example of a double standard. But I bet that you’re applying the “you can’t prove he doesn’t exist” logic to your god only…
(Note: please keep any comments related to the above question / answer, and not to other subjects, such as whether God exists or not. Thanks.)







Recent Comments