The relationship between religious belief and proof in Bertrand Russell

In this study, we've examined Bertrand Russel's opinions on the relationship between belief and proof. What must be in our beliefs, has been one of the most important in both epistemology and theism in the context of religious phylosophy. We've tried to handle the discussion about whether belief of God or religious belief systems need proof or not, regarding Russel's opinions' frame. In the first part of our study, we've tried to touch on the issues such as evidentalism, reform epistemology, fideism and critical rationalism regarding the relationship between belief and proof in religious phylosophy. We've handled the opinions towards the issue "what should be in the base of faith of God". In the second part we've handled our real issue: Russel's approach towards belief and proof relationship. First, we've touched on the criteria Russel explains for evaluating our beliefs by explaining the terms of belief and proof. Then we've given information about the proofs claimed by theism on God's existence and we've debated to what extent do these proofs explain Russel's criteria. Finally, we've touched on Russel's opinions on agnosticism and tried to explain his excuses.