View The Burden of Proof
That pesky burden of proof - the apologist’s bane.
There is a reason why apologists define atheism as the positive denial of the existence of deities and engage in torturous attempts to define the uncommitted atheistic position, non-theism, away: the burden of proof. It is very obvious that many apologists are more than just frustrated by the non-theists ability to take pot shots at the apologist’s proof with impunity, while not offering a position to counter-attack.
It is very simple, though. It is the theists that make the positive claim, therefore by any rational standard the burden of proof is theirs. They try to redefine all atheists as making a positive claim of their own and subsequently try to shift the burden of proof. Even when faced with atheists indeed making the positive claim of deities not existing, the apologist’s ploy has an incurable defect. Without theists first positing the existence of deities, there would be no atheists and therefore, theists have to go first. To be more specific, they first have to define ‘deity’ and then make arguments why a deity thus defined exists. If they can’t make a strong enough case, the non-theist’s work is already done.
Back to True Believers