Originally posted by KellyJay
I disagree I do not have a burden of proof, I'm not making any
scientific claims. Besides, the scriptures state that God calls and
His own hear His voice and respond to Him. The fact that there are
those that accept or reject God have nothing to do with science
it is faith.
Kelly
I disagree I do not have a burden of proof, I'm not making any scientific claims.
I disagree somewhat with both Starrman and KellyJay here—
If all the atheist/agnostic says is, “I have not found any evidence (natural, scientific, logical, mystical, whatever) that a God exists,” then they have made no claim and have no burden of proof that I can see.
Science, by its very nature assumes a burden of proof since it is based on evidence, testable hypotheses, etc. Scientists willingly embrace this burden; it is part of the discipline.
A theist who asserts the existence of a God, also assumes a burden of proof, it seems to me, in making the claim.
An atheist who asserts that there is no God is also making a claim. (So is the “strong agnostic,” who makes the positive assertion that it is not possible to “prove”—and there are many levels of “proof”— one way or the other.) The assertion that there is no God is like a null-hypothesis, which is subject to proof or disproof, directly or indirectly. Many atheists do make the claim “no God,” on rational or empirical grounds, whether or not they are “required” to do so.
Besides, the scriptures state that God calls and His own hear His voice and respond to Him.
If God calls, and I do not hear, does this just mean that I am not “his own,” and there’s nothing to do about it? If so, there’s no sense worrying about it one way or the other. If you claim, however, that the “fault” lays with me—let’s say, for example, not that I’m stubborn, but that I honestly misinterpret the “call:” I conclude, based on whatever evidence and how I weigh it, that it is an unconscious projection—then it seems to me that you also have a burden of proof.
I know you dislike this kind of question, Kelly, but does God have no “burden of proof” at all? I mean, unless there is plain, straightforward and unquestionable evidence for God that is available and easily recognizable to all—something beyond mystery and allusion that we’re just supposed to believe without evidence—how can God expect people to believe on that basis? (You might, of course, turn it around and say that I, as a mere human, have no right to place such expectations on God, but I think that would be just begging the question.)