If I walked into a room with absolutely nothing and someone said to me there's actually a chair in it, do I still have to prove it's an empty room? Such is what theists demand of atheists when they ask for proof of the non-existence of the supernatural. It is not for the one saying, "there is nothing," to prove there is nothing. If there's nothing, there simply is nothing. There's nothing to prove. It is for the one saying, "there is something," to substantiate the validity of the claim.
They're both delusional. Just in oppositional terms. Both make assumptions about things they don't understand in an attempt to make sense of the incomprehensible. They're actually more alike than they ever want to admit.
The fallacy of shifting the burden of proof occurs when someone making a claim does not respect their obligation to provide the needed evidence for it, but instead attempts to shift the burden to their opponent.
For example, when someone makes a claim that God is not real, instead of showing why they believe they are correct, they shift their burden of proof to their opponent by asserting that it’s their responsibility to disprove it.
As such, this fallacious line of reasoning is commonly involved with claims that are unfalsifiable, that is, claims that are not possible to disprove. Many religious and supernatural claims that cannot be scientifically proven are examples of unfalsifiable propositions.
Religious people are the menace of this world. Thinking that such divine and a fairytale story called "Heaven" actually exists. They be doing the most.