Argument from Disbelief

Peace & Blessings Beloved,

TGBTG for allowing us to see another day. I pray all is well with you and yours, and that your week has been fruitful & blessed thus far.


Having a foundational understanding of what apologetics is, and how it applies to us, we were able to move on to cover the first apologetic argument in our series: the argument from reason. Next, we'll spend time studying the Argument from Disbelief. Again, these arguments will enable us to better equip ourselves, not only in defending our faith, but in fortifying it.


The argument from disbelief is that the presence of sincere non-believers proves God cannot exist. It suggests there are many people willing to believe in God, if only they were given sufficient evidence. The fact that these people have not been given proper evidence is seen as proof that there is no loving God to provide such evidence or that such evidence is simply non-existent. This claim is also referred to as reasonable non-belief, inculpable disbelief, or occasionally the philosophical objection.


Simply put, the argument from disbelief claims that, if God is real, He would make Himself known in such a way that anyone who was sincerely willing would in fact believe in Him.


The argument from disbelief operates under two primary assumptions; both of which you'll see the falsity within. First is that there is such a thing as an objective, sincere, and willing non-believer. The second is that God has failed to provide enough evidence to lead to the truth. There is also a third premise, somewhat hidden in the argument, related to whether or not God