I was an atheist when I first said that to a Christian more than 40 years ago. I must say it felt pretty good to say those words. It makes one feel superior to tell a person they cannot prove something they believe. Most Christians I said that to personally and on my radio talk show either crumbled or exploded at that point. Either reaction was fine with me.
I am no longer an atheist, but still believe the statement to be true. We cannot “prove” the existence of God, but we don’t have to.
Before I believed in God, I thought the only things that were real were those things I could prove through my senses–sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell. I had never seen God, never heard God, never touched God, never tasted God, never smelled God, and didn’t know anyone who had. I dared God to sit down in a radio studio for a live interview during my afternoon talk show back in 1970. I gave him ten seconds to show up, but He didn’t appear. I sarcastically told the audience that God must be under the weather or away on vacation.
That’s the way many people think today. They believe some of what they see and little or nothing of what they don’t see. If it isn’t on TV or YouTube or some other visual media or they can’t see it with their own eyes, it doesn’t exist.
Why is it that God won’t show Himself to us? If God exists, He certainly must want people to believe He exists. Why doesn’t He show Himself to the world? Why no absolute proof?
It’s important to remember that God has shown Himself to lots of people in the past. That’s what takes up a lot of the discussion between Christians and atheists. Christians believe God did appear to hundreds of thousands of Israelites in the wilderness between Egypt and Canaan. Christians believe God did appear to scores of Hebrew kings and prophets and priests. Christians believe the Son of God did appear to thousands of people in Israel during a period of 33 years.
Atheists say “prove it.” They want to see God with their own eyes or at least in a video they can verify wasn’t altered. Why didn’t God come in the flesh now so He could be photographed and filmed and recorded and stamped with our approval?
God had His reasons to come to earth when He did. He didn’t come to satisfy the curiosity of today’s atheists or agnostics. He came at the perfect moment for His eternal purposes. His appearances have most often had to do with the nation of Israel – from Abraham to Moses to David to Jeremiah to John the Baptist to Jesus Christ. The Bible says God will appear again to Israel and to the entire world in the future. Atheists will get their “wish” to see God in person one day.
Atheists often ask me why I became a Christian. One atheist scolded me by saying that I must have been a very “bad” atheist to have become a Christian. He probably has a point if the definition of an atheist is someone who will never believe the truth even when there is strong reason to believe it is true.
Maybe atheism has changed since the 60s and 70s. I thought myself a member of a great group of “free thinkers.” We were free to think for ourselves, unfettered by the religious bondage of the masses. One difference, though, was that I thought of myself as being free to really think for myself. I wasn’t bound by the thoughts of anyone, even other atheists. So, as a free thinker and professional journalist, when I received new information I looked into it, asked questions, dug for answers. That’s what a free thinker does, right?
It’s interesting that atheists, agnostics and other unbelievers don’t use the same skills when asking for proof of the existence of God today. For thousands of years the human race had no idea what was going on in the “invisible” world of the human body or the solar systems so distant in the nighttime sky. The beliefs of science have changed through the centuries as scientists acquired new skills because of new information and technology. What they once thought could not be proven has been proven.
The same is true about the existence of God. I firmly believe that God exists and that’s based on acquiring new skills because of new information and technology. That technology is called Faith. The information is called Truth.
Faith is the “substance” of things hoped for and the “evidence” of things not seen. God will show Himself to those who seek Him. He wants people to know Him and become part of His family. The problem atheists and other unbelievers have is defining “faith” in their terms rather than the terms of the One Who created faith. If we want to understand the definition, we must seek the wisdom of the Definer.
Can you “prove” the existence of God? No. Can you establish strong reasons for believing in the existence of God? Yes.
Can an atheist “prove” that God does not exist? No. Can they establish strong reasons for not believing in the existence of God? No.
Many free thinking atheists have come to that same conclusion – that the reasons for not believing in God are extremely weak in light of the reasons for believing in God.
Here’s to thinking for yourself and being open to the Truth.
Mark McGee
Any “truth claim” bears a burden of proof, it applies to both theist and atheist claims. As for the Purple Dragon, it isnt an argument against the existence of God, its just seems like an appeal to ridicule, which is a fallacy.
Can we really “prove” the existence of anything? Our society has forgotten the method’s we use to try and come to a reasonable conclusion of a historical event or the existence of something. I think it would be a good thing to start with the knowablility of certain events or things and work from there for some people. Even if you come at them with all the evidence in the world, if they don’t know how to come to that conclusion, then it’s probably in vain.
Your talking absolute nonsense. No one can prove the existence of God, or non existence of God, but the burden of proof is on the one who makes the claim of his existence. You can’t prove the non existence of a purple dragon that hovers above every persons head, keeping a eye on you for safety reasons. Sometimes they fly away to help other dragons, thus leaving you vunerable to accidents, but most of the time the dragon is there, and I have proof! I feel it’s presence in my heart. Do you think I am talking nonsense? I think you may. But if you have a little faith, you’ll surely see truth of my claim.
What are your documented sources for the existence of the purple dragon?
I read about it in a book. There are many interpretations of the dragon though. Some call him “Spyro” (Wikipedia). There is a video game about him that was coded by the “Master Dragon”, compiled through humans at Insomnia Games. Others refer to him as “Dwynen” (Amazon) and dragon fundamentalists refer to him as “Figment”(Wikipedia) and believe these dragons were born in Walt Disney World resort, their hallowed ground.
But the difference between Purple Dragonism and Christianity is that dragonists do not pray to the “Master Dragon”. That would be ridiculous.
I read it in a book. There are many interpretations though. Some call the purple dragon “Spyro”(Wikipedia) and it is said that a group of dragonists were inspired to compile a video game through divine inspiration by the Master of Dragons, named “Dwynwen”.(http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dwynwen-The-Purple-Dragon-Beanie/dp/B003YLVQQE/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1345579947&sr=8-1-spell). Purple Dragon fundamentalists refer to him as “Figment”(Wikipedia) who is believed to have been born in Walt Disney World, their hallowed ground. But the difference between Purple Dragonism & Christians is that Dragonists do not pray to the Purple One. That would be ridiculous.
Wikipedia–now there’s an authoritative, scholarly source for you!
A work of literature written by humans over two thousand years ago….
If someone is reading our conversation 2,000 years from now, is it not really happening? I’m feeling so unreal right now.
Of course our conversation happened, and of course the Bible was written. It does not mean the content of the book was written by a god or that anyone should live their life in accordance with 2000 year old literature.
We are straying from the original post. The issue is not whether a god wrote the text, the issue is whether it records actual events, specifically events in which God actively participated. (P.S. truth is true no matter how long ago it was recorded or recognized…)
I absolutely agree. We know the gospels were written 30 -100 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, second and third hand stories and rumours, and we all know how they turn out. People can’t get their stories straight from last week, let alone 30 years+ 🙂 You are correct that the truth is still the truth no matter how old, but the same can be said about a lie.
So, your theory is that it’s all a lie? Matthew and John are first hand accounts, and Luke wrote his Gospel from eye witness accounts. If it’s all a lie, how does that explain the undesigned coincidences? http://www.apologeticalliance.com/blog/2012/08/undesigned-scriptural-coincidences-the-ring-of-truth/ Would you die for a lie?