This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SW-User
Short answer; no.
The reason being, we can’t accept every claim as true, otherwise we’d end up believing in contradictory claims (i.e. Islam and Christianity cannot both be true since they hold contradictory doctrines and ethical codes), so there has to be a “buffer” if you like, a way for us to determine what’s true and what’s not true. Usually, that’s via the application of the scientific method, logic and reason.
If someone proposes “a God exists”, you can either accept it as true (theism) or reject it (atheism). It’s up to those who accept the proposition as true to prove it.
An easier way to demonstrate this is through the court analogy: we don’t assess innocence in court, we assess guilt. If someone claims you’re guilty of a crime, it is for the prosecution to demonstrate this, it’s not for you to demonstrate your innocence.
The burden is on the prosecution to prove their claim that you are guilty; the burden is on theists to prove their claim a God exists.
There’s a lot more to it, so I’d suggest reading up on Matt Dillahunty’s Court Analogy if you’d like to know more.
The reason being, we can’t accept every claim as true, otherwise we’d end up believing in contradictory claims (i.e. Islam and Christianity cannot both be true since they hold contradictory doctrines and ethical codes), so there has to be a “buffer” if you like, a way for us to determine what’s true and what’s not true. Usually, that’s via the application of the scientific method, logic and reason.
If someone proposes “a God exists”, you can either accept it as true (theism) or reject it (atheism). It’s up to those who accept the proposition as true to prove it.
An easier way to demonstrate this is through the court analogy: we don’t assess innocence in court, we assess guilt. If someone claims you’re guilty of a crime, it is for the prosecution to demonstrate this, it’s not for you to demonstrate your innocence.
The burden is on the prosecution to prove their claim that you are guilty; the burden is on theists to prove their claim a God exists.
There’s a lot more to it, so I’d suggest reading up on Matt Dillahunty’s Court Analogy if you’d like to know more.