無神論證據主義者認爲為：(1) 信仰上帝是符合理性的，僅當有足夠的證據證明上帝是存在的；(2)沒有足夠的證據證明上帝是存在的；因此，(3) 信仰上帝是不合理性的。當代有神論者回應
無神論證據主義的策略主要有三種：第一種策略是有神論證據主義者所採用的，他們反對「沒有足夠的證據證明上帝存在」這種論調；第二個策略是信仰主義者所採用的，他們反對「信仰上帝
是符合理性的，僅當有足夠的證據證明上帝是存在的」這種證據原則；第三種策略是改革宗知識論者所採用的，他們宣稱：理性地信仰上帝不要有足夠的證據，信仰上帝具有恰當的基礎。筆者
認爲，證據主義雖然預設了未經證實甚至不太合理的經典基礎主義，然而在對待宗教信念上，應該強調證據的作用。

Atheistic evidentialists hold: (1) Belief in God is rational only if
there is evidence for the existence of God. (2) There is not sufficient
evidence for the existence of God. Therefore, (3) belief in God is
irrational. There are three kinds of strategies for contemporary theists
to reject atheistic evidentialism. Theistic evidentialists, who oppose the
view “there is not sufficient evidence for the existence of God,” adopt
the first strategy. Fideists, who are against the evidential principle “belief in God is rational only if there is evidence for the existence of God,”adopt the second strategy. Reformed epistemology adopts the third strategy, and claim that rational belief in God does not need sufficient evidence and belief in God is properly basic. In this paper, I believe that evidentialists suppose an unproved and even unreasonable classical foundationalism, but it is necessary to emphasize on evidential functions.