There are many discussions on this forum asking that Christian doctrines be proven (according to what one understands 'proof' to mean).
By 'proof', the person usually means "The validation of a proposition by application of specified rules, as of induction or deduction, to assumptions, axioms, and sequentially derived conclusions". This reasoning is erroneously employed to show the validity of one's stated position of faith. However, this entirely misses the point...
Here is what the Bible clearly defines as faith: Hebrews 4:11 (NRSVue) shows the fundamental error of this approach: "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."
In other words, it is folly to apply the conventional standard of proof to one's religious convictions. Since it is both assurance and conviction, the conventional standard of proof clearly does not apply.
Isn't it about time that some people stopped challenging a person's faith by applying the principle of "proof"?