When atheists ask for proof


Dear Atheist friend,

Your demand for proof raises a problem. “Proof” is not a part of your worldview, and asking for it undermines your argument.

Honest atheism does not admit the existence of any absolute standard, any true point of reference. Everything is governed by chaos; the universe is only stardust randomly bumping into stardust. Within a consistent, atheistic paradigm nothing could ever be truly known or proven.

The idea of “proof” belongs to the worldview of those who believe in a Supreme Creator who has put order, logic, consistency, and structure into the universe. A believer in a wise, all knowing Creator can think in terms of “proof” and “evidence,” but not a person who sees the universe as a random collision of particles.

Your request presupposes something you don’t believe in. It borrows from the worldview you are trying to deny.

Your statement self-destructs.

Nice try.


6 thoughts on “When atheists ask for proof

  1. Maybe you are hanging around with the wrong atheists, but this sounds like a lot of over-thinking nonsense. If you are asking me to believe in god, then yes, I’m going to need something like proof before I can oblige your request. Because I tried to believe, and the available information doesn’t add up to god for me. I’m sorry if it upsets you, but I cannot help it.

    On the other hand, if you are NOT asking me to believe in god, then whatever. Don’t sweat it. And in the future, if you encounter an atheist who demands that you prove the existence of god in spite of the fact that you have made no request that they believe as you do? Just walk away, man. Just walk away.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. If you believe that God must have created logic, do you come to that conclusion BY logic? Then your argument is circular at best, self-refuting at worst. Also, it God created logic, why is it almost impossible to logically prove his own existence?

    And I must shame on you for your very aggressive intellectually dishonest assertion that atheism implies absolute ‘chaos’, well, it doesn’t.


    • The request for proof assumes that there is logic behind the universe that we should all respect. For a believer in a Supreme Wise Creator that makes perfect sense. For an atheist that believes we are simply the result of random, undirected, accidental events, how can you appeal to something authoritative above us called logic?

      You correctly pointed out my spelling error (By mistake I wrote the word in Spanish and not English) because you have the authority of a dictionary to back you up. And you’re right. If there is no God, to what authority do you appeal to to back up the idea of and the need for logical proof? Who wrote the rational “dictionary” of logic that you think we should all respect?


      • “The request for proof assumes that there is logic behind the universe that we should all respect.”

        This very statement comes from logic, not from meta-logic, are you getting me? You are trying to prove A created B by using B, which is circular.

        And then, you can take it from an pragmatist perspective. Logic is the study of patterns of the universe. There is no abstract “dictionary” of logical rules, laws of logic are descriptions, not prescriptions. In that way, logic does not need to be created.

        But again, if God created logic, why is the concept of himself illogical? For example, if he is omnipotent, can he create a burger so hot that he cannot eat it?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s