60 replies to this topic

[natewood3]

Can the non-existence of God be proven? Can you who do not believe in God prove that He does not exist?

Just a question...

[DonkSlayer]

....that has been beaten to dead-horse status by several threads in this forum, many of which are on the front page.

[timwakefield]

Prove to me that leprachauns do not exist and I will give you $50.

[screech]

Prove to me that leprachauns do not exist and I will give you $50.

or that god does exist, and I will give you $20 000.

That's the point. Religion is set up in such a way that it is impossible to prove for or agianst god, which makes the whole idea of arguing one way or the other a huge waste of time.

Now, a better question would be, what do you think the probability of god existing is, and, what is your evidence for making such an estimation.

My guess is that a god outlined in various religions is virtually nonexistant. I would give him a 0.000001% chance of actually existing. Some reasons are:
1) he hasn't made his present known in the past few thousand years. no burning bush, no second coming, nothing like that.
2) the only "evidence" that he does exist is a book that was written thousands of years ago, that is filled with contradictions and flaws.
3) it is extremely unlikely that an all-knowing being acts with the spitefulness that he shows in the bible.
4) the whole idea that he preconditions humans to behave a certain way, demands that they act another way, all the while knowing that most can't/won't. and his bizarre reward/punishment scheme set up in this framework.

[checkymcfold]

Can the non-existence of God be proven? Can you who do not believe in God prove that He does not exist?

Just a question...

probably not, at least in any manner that both sides would agree upon.

but i think it's nice that we still have things to wonder about in this world. makes for a more interesting existence, methinks.

[Petoria]

or that god does exist, and I will give you $20 000.

That's the point. Religion is set up in such a way that it is impossible to prove for or agianst god, which makes the whole idea of arguing one way or the other a huge waste of time.

Now, a better question would be, what do you think the probability of god existing is, and, what is your evidence for making such an estimation.

My guess is that a god outlined in various religions is virtually nonexistant. I would give him a 0.000001% chance of actually existing. Some reasons are:
1) he hasn't made his present known in the past few thousand years. no burning bush, no second coming, nothing like that.
2) the only "evidence" that he does exist is a book that was written thousands of years ago, that is filled with contradictions and flaws.
3) it is extremely unlikely that an all-knowing being acts with the spitefulness that he shows in the bible.
4) the whole idea that he preconditions humans to behave a certain way, demands that they act another way, all the while knowing that most can't/won't. and his bizarre reward/punishment scheme set up in this framework.

rant much?

To the OP, that's why religion is awesome. It can't be proved or disproved. That's why I suggest that everyone on this board goes out right now, and starts their own religion. You've got to sell it though, I mean, really sell it. If you do a good job, you might get billions of weak-minded people to join, and you'll be the richest person in the world (bc religions are tax-exempt.)

I ranting as well.

[Loismustdie]

or that god does exist, and I will give you $20 000.

That's the point. Religion is set up in such a way that it is impossible to prove for or agianst god, which makes the whole idea of arguing one way or the other a huge waste of time.

Now, a better question would be, what do you think the probability of god existing is, and, what is your evidence for making such an estimation.

My guess is that a god outlined in various religions is virtually nonexistant. I would give him a 0.000001% chance of actually existing. Some reasons are:
1) he hasn't made his present known in the past few thousand years. no burning bush, no second coming, nothing like that.
2) the only "evidence" that he does exist is a book that was written thousands of years ago, that is filled with contradictions and flaws.
3) it is extremely unlikely that an all-knowing being acts with the spitefulness that he shows in the bible.
4) the whole idea that he preconditions humans to behave a certain way, demands that they act another way, all the while knowing that most can't/won't. and his bizarre reward/punishment scheme set up in this framework.

The second coming- you make that a basis for not believing- if the second coming happens then it's to late!! That's like saying you most definitely cannot contract hiv while having unprotected sex with an hiv postive person because it hasn't happened..... yet. God wants it his way and his way only- one mans spite is another mans justice. The Bible is not flawed, it's just unacceptable to YOU- which is fine, God tells us you will be around, to persecute and I will be blessed for dealing with it.

You are preconditioned to do absolutely nothing- we all have the ability to tell ourselves no and there is nothing that he requires that is not mentally good for you- in fact, they very opposite is true. And for the first one, he said he would not show himself anymore, until the second coming- and, he ahsn't. What's the problem? I will tell you.... you. That's it. The only reason you cannot accept is because you fall short- many have fallen short, so you are not alone.

rant much?

To the OP, that's why religion is awesome. It can't be proved or disproved. That's why I suggest that everyone on this board goes out right now, and starts their own religion. You've got to sell it though, I mean, really sell it. If you do a good job, you might get billions of weak-minded people to join, and you'll be the richest person in the world (bc religions are tax-exempt.)

I ranting as well.

I could, but I wouldn't do it. I couldn't live with myself. In my mind, leaders of false religion are the worst kind of criminal.

[screech]

The second coming- you make that a basis for not believing- if the second coming happens then it's to late!! That's like saying you most definitely cannot contract hiv while having unprotected sex with an hiv postive person because it hasn't happened..... yet. God wants it his way and his way only- one mans spite is another mans justice. The Bible is not flawed, it's just unacceptable to YOU- which is fine, God tells us you will be around, to persecute and I will be blessed for dealing with it.

You are preconditioned to do absolutely nothing- we all have the ability to tell ourselves no and there is nothing that he requires that is not mentally good for you- in fact, they very opposite is true. And for the first one, he said he would not show himself anymore, until the second coming- and, he ahsn't. What's the problem? I will tell you.... you. That's it. The only reason you cannot accept is because you fall short- many have fallen short, so you are not alone.

Are you serious? I give a list of things, and you pick out one on a technicality to try and smear my argument. ****ing brilliant.

Oh right. He said he wouldn't show himself any more. That ties itself up nicely. Another reason you can't argue against such a sound theory. Tell me, why does god create the universe, put a son on earth 2000 years ago, gets some guys to write a book with many contradictions (maybe he never got them to write it, but he knew they would), never edited that book, hasn't said a word since, and wants us to believe in it when he knows all the while that most logical people will think it's nothing more than a fancy tale?

And don't give me that lame *** "his master plan" defense. Jesus Christ.

Hey, I just heard of this new religion. Apparently, eveyrhting in the bible was written by god as a test. Those that blindly follow it, will be deemed clueless sheep and sent to the slaughter (hell) after they die. Those that question it, and actually use their brains to think for themselves, will spend an enternity in eutopia with god, because an all-knowing being wants people at least semi-intelligent to converse with.

If you can't prove it wrong, it must be right.

I could, but I wouldn't do it. I couldn't live with myself. In my mind, leaders of false religion are the worst kind of criminal.

Wow. Really? False religion? What do you mean by that? Can't be the one with the guy with the funny hat...

Seriously though, I'd like to know what you mean. Are you saying that all people who believe in religions other than yours are the worst kind of criminals? Because if so, wow.

[natewood3]

If you cannot prove that God does NOT exist, then it is impossible, as a non-Christian, to be sure of anything. You cannot be sure that ANY decision you are making is right, because it may be that you are living your life in opposition to your Creator. If you consistently reject the God of the Bible while not being able to prove that He does not exist, then it is possible, even within your worldview, that you may die and go to hell. It is possible that you don't know all the facts. It is possible that God does exist and that you are accountable to Him. Hence, how can you be sure that anything you do is good or right if you cannot be for sure that the God of the Bible does not exist?

[screech]

If you cannot prove that God does NOT exist, then it is impossible, as a non-Christian, to be sure of anything. You cannot be sure that ANY decision you are making is right, because it may be that you are living your life in opposition to your Creator. If you consistently reject the God of the Bible while not being able to prove that He does not exist, then it is possible, even within your worldview, that you may die and go to hell. It is possible that you don't know all the facts. It is possible that God does exist and that you are accountable to Him. Hence, how can you be sure that anything you do is good or right if you cannot be for sure that the God of the Bible does not exist?

I think it was a gambler, or someone who worked with probabilities that said you are better off believing in god no matter how unrealistic it seems, just because if you don't and you're wrong, than the consequcnes are pretty dire, whereas if you do, and you're wrong, there are no real consequences.

Makes sense. But, I believe that the probability of a christian god is so low, that it is worth risking spending an enternity in hell over it. Also, I think that you do give up a little in this life if you try to follow the bible to a tee.

Now, you say that if you constantly reject the god of the bible, that you may die and go to hell, but that's only if you that god exists. What if your faith is wrong, and it's really another religions god who is the true creator? Aren't you taking a risk by not believing in that god? Does that mean one should try to follow all religions?

Also, you give the same tired arguement that no one can prove that god does not exist. Of course not. No one argues against that. Religion is set up in such a way to make it impossible, just as you can't prove to me that god is not, in fact, the sun. If you are trying to argue for religion, than saying things like "You can't prove god doesn't exist", only weakens your position as a person capable of carrying out an intelligent discussion.

Again, it is not on the skeptics to disprove any idea. It is on the ideas founders to prove it. And it has been repeated to death on these forums all the holes in religion.

[LongLiveYorke]

If you cannot prove that God does NOT exist, then it is impossible, as a non-Christian, to be sure of anything. You cannot be sure that ANY decision you are making is right, because it may be that you are living your life in opposition to your Creator. If you consistently reject the God of the Bible while not being able to prove that He does not exist, then it is possible, even within your worldview, that you may die and go to hell. It is possible that you don't know all the facts. It is possible that God does exist and that you are accountable to Him. Hence, how can you be sure that anything you do is good or right if you cannot be for sure that the God of the Bible does not exist?

Who are you, Descartes? Do we really have to go through all this again? Okay, here it goes:

You can't prove anything 100% in the world, be it God, the fact that the sky is blue, etc. There's always a chance that things are wrong or that the world is conspiring against you or that some malicious demon is messing with your brain, tricking you all your life. However, as smart people, we can consider the probabilities (roughly) that certain things are true. More importantly, we can reason that the only way a person could really go about his everyday life without going insane is by taking for "truth" what is most likely so and what we can gather from our senses to be actual.

Yes, it may turn out that my whole life consisted of my brain being in a jar and Zeus was stimulating my neurons with lightning bolts and now I won't go to Valhalla because I didn't worship Odin enough (apparently Odin and Zeus are good friends and have a poker game going on the weekends). But I'll take my chances, accept the sky is blue because it is and not because Quetzalcoatl wants me to think so (yeah, he's in the game too, though he prefers to play Bridge).

Seriously, you can say same thing about any god or about anything for that matter. Believe me, you’re lucky I got here first. Someone’s going to come in and talk about spaghetti monsters, and no one wants that. Mmmm, Spaghetti monsters. What was I saying?

I think it was a gambler, or someone who worked with probabilities that said you are better off believing in god no matter how unrealistic it seems, just because if you don't and you're wrong, than the consequcnes are pretty dire, whereas if you do, and you're wrong, there are no real consequences.

It's called "Pascal's Wager" by a guy named Blaise Pascal who was a mathematician and a philosopher back in the 1600's. His real goal behind the wager was to show people that considering the existence of God is a meaningful discussion, though many misapply his idea and use it to support faith in God for fear of Hell. There are flaws behind this reasoning.

[speedz99]

Hey, I just heard of this new religion. Apparently, eveyrhting in the bible was written by god as a test. Those that blindly follow it, will be deemed clueless sheep and sent to the slaughter (hell) after they die. Those that question it, and actually use their brains to think for themselves, will spend an enternity in eutopia with god, because an all-knowing being wants people at least semi-intelligent to converse with.

If you can't prove it wrong, it must be right.

[Petoria]

I could, but I wouldn't do it. I couldn't live with myself. In my mind, leaders of false religion are the worst kind of criminal.

Yeah, there's a lot of them, many more than you'd care to admit though. Or maybe just one more.

[SilentSnow]

Yeah, there's a lot of them, many more than you'd care to admit though. Or maybe just one more.

ive always thought that was sort of ironic.

the religious argue that 9999 religions are false.

the atheists and agnostics say that 10000 religions are false.

yet the religious act as if there is a tremendous gap between the
2 sides.

(the 10000 number is of course arbritrary. you can have as few as 2 religions(god/no god) or
one for every person who has ever lived, depending on your definition of religion.)

[Loismustdie]

Are you serious? I give a list of things, and you pick out one on a technicality to try and smear my argument. ****ing brilliant.

Oh right. He said he wouldn't show himself any more. That ties itself up nicely. Another reason you can't argue against such a sound theory. Tell me, why does god create the universe, put a son on earth 2000 years ago, gets some guys to write a book with many contradictions (maybe he never got them to write it, but he knew they would), never edited that book, hasn't said a word since, and wants us to believe in it when he knows all the while that most logical people will think it's nothing more than a fancy tale?

And don't give me that lame *** "his master plan" defense. Jesus Christ.

Hey, I just heard of this new religion. Apparently, eveyrhting in the bible was written by god as a test. Those that blindly follow it, will be deemed clueless sheep and sent to the slaughter (hell) after they die. Those that question it, and actually use their brains to think for themselves, will spend an enternity in eutopia with god, because an all-knowing being wants people at least semi-intelligent to converse with.

If you can't prove it wrong, it must be right.
Wow. Really? False religion? What do you mean by that? Can't be the one with the guy with the funny hat...

Seriously though, I'd like to know what you mean. Are you saying that all people who believe in religions other than yours are the worst kind of criminals? Because if so, wow.

Actually, I gave you answers to all your issues- if you read the whole reply instead of just reacting to the first sentence you would know that. Read, and then speak.

I am saying that the leaders, the guys behind the screen pulling the strings are the worst kind of criminals because they do exactly what you claim they do- take advantage of weakminded people who have a need for God and feed them smooth lies with one goal in mind- money. No church that I have ever been affiliated with has ever been after my money- it's not what God intended.

The thing is, they know that they are liars, which is why we have so many versions of the Bible. What do you do when what you teach contradicts God's word? Easy- make a new, better translation that better explains what YOU think it should say. Man, it's so blatant that some religions don't even bother to change it- they just put actual lines through scriptures that they don't agree with. The manipulation of people through pseudo versions of God's word is just a travesty, but a travesty that was to be expected- heck, it started in the Bible when the people told the apostles, "Preach unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits." NOBODY can be lied to unless they want it, so in some ways it's the individuals own fault, but I stand by my statement on religion as a whole.

Yeah, there's a lot of them, many more than you'd care to admit though. Or maybe just one more.

All of them except one.

[screech]

Actually, I gave you answers to all your issues- if you read the whole reply instead of just reacting to the first sentence you would know that. Read, and then speak.

I did read the rest.

The Bible is not flawed, it's just unacceptable to YOU- which is fine, God tells us you will be around, to persecute and I will be blessed for dealing with it.

You are preconditioned to do absolutely nothing- we all have the ability to tell ourselves no and there is nothing that he requires that is not mentally good for you- in fact, they very opposite is true. And for the first one, he said he would not show himself anymore, until the second coming- and, he ahsn't. What's the problem? I will tell you.... you. That's it. The only reason you cannot accept is because you fall short- many have fallen short, so you are not alone.

Summary:
You say I will be persecuted and you will be blessed. I can deal with that. The odds IMO are pretty low that that will happen. But if the longshot comes in, I guess you win.
You offer some more random words, that don't make any point (maybe I'm too dumb to pick up on it), then say the reason we haven't seen god is because he said he wouldn't show himself until it's too late.

Ok. Hard to argue with that. Religion is tied up pretty nicely, huh? Whoever wrote that book was smart enough to try and make sure it would be impossible for any one to call him out on it. But there were a few things he couldn't forsee. Like how technology would advance far enough that we could prove the earth is much older than 5000 years old.

I am saying that the leaders, the guys behind the screen pulling the strings are the worst kind of criminals because they do exactly what you claim they do- take advantage of weakminded people who have a need for God and feed them smooth lies with one goal in mind- money. No church that I have ever been affiliated with has ever been after my money- it's not what God intended.

Well put. We agree again.

The thing is, they know that they are liars, which is why we have so many versions of the Bible. What do you do when what you teach contradicts God's word? Easy- make a new, better translation that better explains what YOU think it should say. Man, it's so blatant that some religions don't even bother to change it- they just put actual lines through scriptures that they don't agree with. The manipulation of people through pseudo versions of God's word is just a travesty, but a travesty that was to be expected- heck, it started in the Bible when the people told the apostles, "Preach unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits." NOBODY can be lied to unless they want it, so in some ways it's the individuals own fault, but I stand by my statement on religion as a whole.

Interesting. So you're saying that some of the stuff in the bible has been manipulated by people trying to earn a buck, and that this is the cause for inconsistencies? That's a valid arguement.

Or are you saying it's a particular religion(s), that do this, and that your religion has the true message? Also, if you don't mind me asking, what religion is yours?

Also, what do you think about my new religion?

[natewood3]

I think it was a gambler, or someone who worked with probabilities that said you are better off believing in god no matter how unrealistic it seems, just because if you don't and you're wrong, than the consequcnes are pretty dire, whereas if you do, and you're wrong, there are no real consequences.

Makes sense. But, I believe that the probability of a christian god is so low, that it is worth risking spending an enternity in hell over it. Also, I think that you do give up a little in this life if you try to follow the bible to a tee.

Now, you say that if you constantly reject the god of the bible, that you may die and go to hell, but that's only if you that god exists. What if your faith is wrong, and it's really another religions god who is the true creator? Aren't you taking a risk by not believing in that god? Does that mean one should try to follow all religions?

Also, you give the same tired arguement that no one can prove that god does not exist. Of course not. No one argues against that. Religion is set up in such a way to make it impossible, just as you can't prove to me that god is not, in fact, the sun. If you are trying to argue for religion, than saying things like "You can't prove god doesn't exist", only weakens your position as a person capable of carrying out an intelligent discussion.

Again, it is not on the skeptics to disprove any idea. It is on the ideas founders to prove it. And it has been repeated to death on these forums all the holes in religion.

I did not argue Pascal' Wager, as if it is better for you to just believe in God since He may exist. I did, however, ask how it is you know know anything at all for sure since you don't even know the answer to the question, "Does God exist?" Non-Christians criticize Christians for not "proving" that He does exist, while all the while they cannot prove that He doesn't. The problem is for unbelievers is that if they cannot prove for certain that He does not exist, then everything they do in life may be wrong and in opposition to God. Hence, you cannot do one thing without having to wonder if you are in opposition to God in doing so. So, how do you know anything at all for sure? Can you make an absolute statement about anything?

Who are you, Descartes? Do we really have to go through all this again? Okay, here it goes:

You can't prove anything 100% in the world, be it God, the fact that the sky is blue, etc. There's always a chance that things are wrong or that the world is conspiring against you or that some malicious demon is messing with your brain, tricking you all your life. However, as smart people, we can consider the probabilities (roughly) that certain things are true. More importantly, we can reason that the only way a person could really go about his everyday life without going insane is by taking for "truth" what is most likely so and what we can gather from our senses to be actual.

LongLiveYorke,

If nothing can be known at all for sure, then what gives you the right to "consider the probabilities that certain things are true"? Probability presupposes the uniformity of nature, so how can you trust that the future is going to be like the past? Language itself presupposes the uniformity of nature, so if you answer and argue that you don't presuppose the uniformity of nature, you have already begged the question.

You basically said a person cannot consistently be a skeptic and not go insane. Correct? If so, you are saying the same thing I am. Skepticism is self-refuting. To say, "You can't prove anything 100% in the world" is a self-refuting statement, because that statement itself cannot be proven either, as nothing you said can. However, I think you must have to be skeptical unless you can prove that God does not exist. If God exists, you have an obligation to conform your thoughts and life to His standard, and as an unbeliever, no one does that. Hence, if you say you don't know if God exists or not, then you cannot know if you are living your whole life in opposition to your Creator. If you could prove He does not exist, then you are fine, but if you cannot, then you cannot know anything you are doing is good or right, since you maybe opposing your Creator in what you are doing.

[crowTrobot]

I did not argue Pascal' Wager, as if it is better for you to just believe in God since He may exist. I did, however, ask how it is you know know anything at all for sure since you don't even know the answer to the question, "Does God exist?" Non-Christians criticize Christians for not "proving" that He does exist, while all the while they cannot prove that He doesn't. The problem is for unbelievers is that if they cannot prove for certain that He does not exist, then everything they do in life may be wrong and in opposition to God. Hence, you cannot do one thing without having to wonder if you are in opposition to God in doing so. So, how do you know anything at all for sure? Can you make an absolute statement about anything?

there is a huge difference between disproof for a generic creator (not possible even for practical purposes), and disproof for anything close to a literal view of the biblical christian god. the existence of the latter definitely has been disproved for practical purposes because it contradicts everything we know about logic in the natural world. while it's true that you can't disprove anything absolutely, it's also true that belief in the latter is simply impractical and pointless - no different than believing in santa claus.

[natewood3]

there is a huge difference between disproof for a generic creator (not possible even for practical purposes), and disproof for anything close to a literal view of the biblical christian god. the existence of the latter definitely has been disproved for practical purposes because it contradicts everything we know about logic in the natural world. while it's true that you can't disprove anything absolutely, it's also true that belief in the latter is simply impractical and pointless - no different than believing in santa claus.

Explain.

[screech]

I did not argue Pascal' Wager, as if it is better for you to just believe in God since He may exist. I did, however, ask how it is you know know anything at all for sure since you don't even know the answer to the question, "Does God exist?"

And I never said I knew for sure. Anything is possible. All I said was that I was near 100% certain he doesn't exist. Logic and evidence (or lack thereof) are all I need to make such an assertion. But obviously no one can say for certain whether he does or does not exist.

Non-Christians criticize Christians for not "proving" that He does exist, while all the while they cannot prove that He doesn't.

That's how logic works. Suppose I propose a theory that the reason the earth rotates on it's axis is because of a giant hampster running in a giant wheel at the center of the earth. Now, can you tell me that this is in fact untrue, with 100% certainty? Of course not. But if I were to try and get my idea to be taken seriously, I would have to offer up some proof. I simply couldn't say "this idea should be taken seriously because no one can prove that I'm wrong".

Religion is much the same way, only it is far stronger because of it's strength in numbers. The reason it has these numbers is not because of evidence supporting it, but because it's an ancient idea which plays off human's desire to be secure and uncover the unknown (ie, gives them hope for the afterlife).

The problem is for unbelievers is that if they cannot prove for certain that He does not exist, then everything they do in life may be wrong and in opposition to God. Hence, you cannot do one thing without having to wonder if you are in opposition to God in doing so. So, how do you know anything at all for sure? Can you make an absolute statement about anything?

I weigh the probabilites. Nothing is certain in life, but things can be very near certain. I take the chance that I am going to hell, because the probability of that happening is virtually non-existent (in the same way I would gamble my soul that there is no hampster in the center of the earth). But, if I mindlessly followed church dogma, I would miss out on a lot of things, such as freedom and sunday mornings.

Honestly, I do everything without wondering if I'm in opposition to god, again, because of such a low weight I give to all that being real. It's like me asking you, "when you walk down the road, do you give any thought to the fact that a meteorite travelling at a zillion miles per hour might strike you in the head?" Of course not. And that's what you believers don't really understand. You think that nonbelievers are just in denial, and deep down, really think the way you do. Trust me, we don't.

Now, let's switch things up a bit. Can you say for sure that this god you believe in exists? How sure are you? What evidence do you have to support this probability?

What if your whole life was spent worshipping something that doesn't exist? Following strict rules in fear of the afterlife? Or even worse, what if the god you believe in is the wrong one, and you pay for an enternity because of it?

Can you make an absolute statement about anything?