Why does the believer in God's existence have the burden of proof?

[LuisDantas]

If you state....there is no God.....
you share the burden as well.

If I am attempting to convince you to do or choose something due to that statement, then you are probably right.

How often does that happen, if at all?

and we all know....thee will be no photo, no fingerprint, no equation and no repeatable experiment.
no proof.

But there are lots of good reasons to believe there is a God......and sooooo many of us.

Actually no, there are not. Instead there are lots of good reasons to doubt it, and many more even not to rely on it even if we believe in his existence.

 

[leibowde84]

It's a belief. Beliefs do not require proof. If you could actually prove it, then it would not qualify as a belief.

"Proof", in this context, merely means "evidence or argument helping to essstablish a fact or the truth of a statement." It doesn't demand absolute proof. If it did, I would agree that it would cease to be a "belief".

 

[Thief]

It's a belief. Beliefs do not require proof. If you could actually prove it, then it would not qualify as a belief.

I think Webster's attributes that notion to faith.
Faith requires no proving.

Belief could well something provable.
Many believed the Earth was flat and the center of all things.
oooops.
Now people believe the Earth is round and the universe is enormous.
It's true.

I say there is a God.
I 'believe' it's true.
I do so for cause and effect.
I do so for reason.

I suspect opponents are harboring a strong supposition that God might also be of judgment.
Of course judgment of nonbelief might be harsh.

Stand before an Almighty God and proclaim ....You are not real!
and the consequence could be dire.

Easier to say He's not real.
no consequence....nothing greater than yourself.
death has nothing to offer.

and you don't have to prove it.....just stop breathing.

 

[Thief]

If I am attempting to convince you to do or choose something due to that statement, then you are probably right.

How often does that happen, if at all?



Actually no, there are not. Instead there are lots of good reasons to doubt it, and many more even not to rely on it even if we believe in his existence.

Got stats for that?

 

[leibowde84]

I think Webster's attributes that notion to faith.
Faith requires no proving.

Belief could well something provable.
Many believed the Earth was flat and the center of all things.
oooops.
Now people believe the Earth is round and the universe is enormous.
It's true.

I say there is a God.
I 'believe' it's true.
I do so for cause and effect.
I do so for reason.

I suspect opponents are harboring a strong supposition that God might also be of judgment.
Of course judgment of nonbelief might be harsh.

Stand before an Almighty God and proclaim ....You are not real!
and the consequence could be dire.

Easier to say He's not real.
no consequence....nothing greater than yourself.
death has nothing to offer.

and you don't have to prove it.....just stop breathing.

Do you think that those who lack a belief in God now will keep that doubt even if/when they are face to face with God?

 

[Thief]

Do you think that those who lack a belief in God now will keep that doubt even if/when they are face to face with God?

When confronted by an afterlife.....and having made declaration of denial....
there could be a very great burden.

 

[leibowde84]

When confronted by an afterlife.....and having made declaration of denial....
there could be a very great burden.

But, will they still deny God when face-to-face with him? If so, why?

 

[Thief]

I see no manner to continue denial of His existence....
but we have all heard rumors of the angelic denying His will .
One third of heaven fell.

If that is true....then freewill is waiting for all.....and you can still say as you please to...
and the consequence of acting upon that freewill is also waiting.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Do you believe in extraterrestrial intelligent life? You can only argue for its existence through reasoning. There is no proof.

Actually...

There is more evidence for extraterrestrial life than there is for any deity that mankind has ever imagined...

 

[LuisDantas]

Got stats for that?

"Stats"? Beliefs about deities are not a statistical matter. They are purely subjective.

In any case, you are going back to the OP's question, which we have already answered.

 

[Willamena]

Why do I as a believer have to justify my personal belief to you?

You don't. The burden of proof is not a demand for proof.

 

[Thief]

"Stats"? Beliefs about deities are not a statistical matter. They are purely subjective.

In any case, you are going back to the OP's question, which we have already answered.

You said something about believers in numbers....
Got numbers?

 

[LuisDantas]

You said something about believers in numbers....
Got numbers?

I don't remember saying such a thing. Got a post?

 

[McBell]

Faith requires no proving.

Which is exactly why so many people hide behind it.

 

[leibowde84]

I think Webster's attributes that notion to faith.
Faith requires no proving.

Belief could well something provable.
Many believed the Earth was flat and the center of all things.
oooops.
Now people believe the Earth is round and the universe is enormous.
It's true.

I say there is a God.
I 'believe' it's true.
I do so for cause and effect.
I do so for reason.

I suspect opponents are harboring a strong supposition that God might also be of judgment.
Of course judgment of nonbelief might be harsh.

Stand before an Almighty God and proclaim ....You are not real!
and the consequence could be dire.

Easier to say He's not real.
no consequence....nothing greater than yourself.
death has nothing to offer.

and you don't have to prove it.....just stop breathing.

There is a difference between something being proven and being provable. You examples were that of things that were provable, but not proven at that time.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think Webster's attributes that notion to faith.
Faith requires no proving.

Unjustified beliefs may qualify as faith, but they don't qualify as rational.

Personally, I wouldn't be satisfied with an irrational faith. Would you?

 

[McBell]

I see no manner to continue denial of His existence....
but we have all heard rumors of the angelic denying His will .
One third of heaven fell.

If that is true....then freewill is waiting for all.....and you can still say as you please to...
and the consequence of acting upon that freewill is also waiting.

empty threats already?

 

[Lyndon]

Actually disbelief requires an irrational faith just as much if not more than belief.

 

[leibowde84]

Actually disbelief requires an irrational faith just as much if not more than belief.

We are talking about merely "a lack of belief in the existence of God". Not believing in something that, in your mind, does not have sufficient evidence to back it up, is not "faith" by any stretch of the imagination. So, what exactly do you mean by your statement. I see it as prudence.

 

[Gambit]

Yes it is.
Some say it is faith.
The reason it is called both is because it cannot be established as fact.

Faith entails belief.

If you make the statement that god exists, not stepping up to the burden of proof makes the statement an empty claim.
It gods very existence is an empty claim, it follows that everything claimed for said god is also empty.

If it is presented as a belief, then it doesn't require proof.