Evading Demands For Proof

The most unintelligent people I have ever encountered have almost always been Christians or atheists.  Oftentimes, Christians characterize the issue of God's existence as if 1) it is an obvious, self-evident truth that God exists, 2) while simultaneously holding that there is still no way to actually prove that God exists (meaning, if true, that one could not actually know it and it is not self-evident) 3) and that both atheism and theism of any kind inescapably involve faith.  Atheists, contrarily, often characterize the issue of God's existence as if agnosticism is equivalent to a form of atheism, erroneously equating a lack of belief in a conclusion to the belief that the conclusion in question is false.

Christians are generally willing to respond to an atheist's demand for proof of theism by merely asking "How do you know God doesn't exist?"  Since most people are thoroughly unintelligent, it is no surprise that, even aside from the fallacies of their personal worldviews, they are content to make assumptions while they selectively call out the assumptions of other people.  Many atheists do the same, only they are willing to make inverse assumptions.  The matter of establishing God's existence is so much simpler than most people realize; at the same time, what does and does not follow from God's existence is far more complex than most people comprehend.

First of all, the existence of a deity (by deity I mean an uncaused cause) can be proven with absolute certainty, but there is only one legitimate proof of its existence [1].  Secondly, if the existence of God could not be established by strict use of logic, there would be no basis whatsoever for belief in theism or atheism.  If theism was unprovable, anyone who believes in the existence of any kind of deity would be guilty of harboring a fallacious worldview.  If atheism was true, one could never do anything more than show that a deity with a nature that contradicts either itself or any logical fact cannot be real [2], and thus could never prove that no deities exist.

Instead of actually reasoning these truths out, many Christians and atheists merely evade demands for proof by deflecting questions with more questions.  The retort "How do you know God doesn't exist?" is one of the most pathetic responses to a request for proof of theism.  Likewise, "How do you know God exists?" is one of the most pathetic responses to a request for proof of atheism.  All the questions accomplish is letting another discussant see that their partner would rather avoid answering questions even if he or she even had answers to begin with.

If every form of both atheism and theism rested on faith, neither would be a sound worldview.  It is far from difficult to prove that any assumption is both avoidable and intellectually reprehensible, for assumptions and knowledge cannot coexist.  If someone cannot prove their claim, they need to modify the claim (for example, "Aliens don't exist" becomes "There is no evidence, much less proof, that aliens exist) or abandon it altogether.  Fortunately, theism is both true and verifiable, since it is logically impossible for there to not be an uncaused cause.  Christians at large cannot grasp this as long as they forsake reason for faith, and atheists cannot grasp this as long as they make assumptions of their own.

Minimal observation reveals that both groups almost always leave certain matters untouched.  Does proving the existence of God also prove the existence of morality?  No.  Does proving the existence of God also prove by default that God seeks personal relationships with humans?  No.  Does the existence of an uncaused cause mean that there are no uncreated things besides that cause?  No.  However, a person will almost certainly not investigate such matters or at all when they don't even understand what it means to prove something to begin with, what the word "God" means, and that faith is not necessary for belief in an uncaused cause.  Shallow people can at best only appraise relatively shallow truths.

Logic, people.  It is very fucking helpful.


[1].  https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-uncaused-cause.html

[2].  For example, a deity cannot be completely merciful and completely just at the same time.  A deity cannot exist and not exist at the same time.  The existence of deities with these characteristics can be disproven before one even considers other gods or goddesses.