“the atheist claims proof of the nonexistence of God” (Page 28, Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions)
A very difficult thing to prove.
One would have to claim proof of the non-existence of a metaphysical realm, which, by virtue of its nature, cannot be ‘sensed’ in the way that entities in the physical realm can be sensed, and whose existence, therefore, cannot be proved or disproved in the way one can prove that Marjory is in the drawing room, knitting, or that there is a half-eaten banana pudding in the fridge. Such proofs could be adduced only philosophically, and, unfortunately, one is up against some pretty heavy-weight philosophers over the history when it comes to the existence of the metaphysical realm. You’d have to prove Kierkegaard and Aristotle wrong. Have at it, but I don’t fancy your odds.
One would also have to prove—even if one conceded that there was a metaphysical realm—that there is no Supreme Being in it. Again, we’re back to the problem of the data.
Proving negatives is thus much harder than proving positives, in general, and in this instance.
It is very hard to assert without direct, physical access to the attic that there are no mice in the attic. But hear one and you can be pretty certain that there are mice in the attic.
The level of proof required against the existence of God is so high that the only reasonable position for the would-be atheist is to claim a preponderance of evidence but withhold final, absolute judgement, in other words to withdraw the premature final judgement or ‘prejudice’.
We’re then looking only for any evidence whatsoever of the existence of the metaphysical realm and of there being an entity within it that is good and powerful and capable of intervening directly in human affairs.
For that, we have Exhibit A: AA.