When discussing my philosophy with a Christian, and I argue that there is no proof that God exists, I am invariably presented with the following argument:

“But there is no proof that God DOESN’T exist.”

This is completely flawed logic. Why? The burden of proof lies on existence. What is the reason for this? If one could simply declare something existent, and then demand everyone else to “prove him wrong,” we would have to spend every minute of every day attempting to disprove ridiculous things, like that there are invisible, massless elves that live on the 2nd floor of DCL. The other problem with such logic is that it is impossible to provide real evidence against something which has no basis in reality. Consider the elves again.

“There are invisible elves on the second floor of DCL!”

“No there aren’t.”

“Just because you can’t see them doesn’t mean they don’t exist.”

“Well we can measure the gravity these supposed elves exert.”

“They are massless, and don’t exert gravity.”

Therein lies the problem. Is it likely that massless, invisible elves really exist, and we are simply unable to perceive them? Well that’s the argument presented in favor of God. He exists, but we are unable to perceive his existence, and we must never attempt to seek proof of his existence. That is the “argument” that perpetuates modern day Christianity, a long-obsolete way of thinking about the world.