Do you KNOW God does not exist?

[leibowde84]

Why not? I see exactly how man made him.

Mans imagination in mythology is not up for debate it is a fact.

Even if you proved that man made the concept of God, how we are familiar with it, and God had never communicated or effected life in any way after creation, it still would not prove that God does not exist. That's my point. Proving that something so ill-defined does not exist is an impossible hill to climb. God is not falsifiable.

 

[leibowde84]

Yeah.... I'm too keen on dissecting parodies of children's song's that are made up on the spot, so...

What does that mean?

 

[outhouse]

How can one possibly prove that something that exists doesn't exist?

You miss my point. I can prove its a man made concept, the only thing up for debate is the level proof one requires.

A court of law, I could prove this. Scientifically I cannot prove what does not exist.

 

[leibowde84]

You miss my point. I can prove its a man made concept, the only thing up for debate is the level proof one requires.

A court of law, I could prove this. Scientifically I cannot prove what does not exist.

How would a court of law apply to this at all?! This is strictly scientifically. There is no law in question, so the legal system is an unreasonable connection. We aren't talking proof beyond a reasonable doubt. We are talking about "knowing that God does not exist". Even when someone is convicted of murder, we don't "know" that he committed the crime. We are merely making an inference based on the evidence that, often, is wrong.

 

[outhouse]

We are talking about "knowing that God does not exist".

Prove he exist, then we can start that debate.

Scientifically it does not exist.

 

[outhouse]

God is not falsifiable.

That's does not give anything credibility as existing.

The status quo is that the concept is mythology.

By historical knowledge alone, I can show how only man defined and redefined the mythological concept at will.

 

[outhouse]

Its like this.

No one doubts that the Canaanite gods are made up mythology.


But few realize that the early Israelites plagiarized the Canaanite concepts and redefined them over hundreds of years, and that the god you know today is a combination of two deities El and Yahweh.

To show how man made the concept is, the only reason there is one god today and not many is because of a political decision by a king who ordered that only one god be followed.

This was not a divine decision. It was a political decision.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I think that anyone who claims to know that God does or does not exist is either being dishonest or they are confused as to what knowledge is. Certainty is an illusion. Any knowledge of this sort is merely a well-substantiated (subjectively) strongly held belief ... a.k.a. "faith".

That kind of puts a tilt on the other side. A theist can't say "God Does exist", he can only say he believes or have faith. I don't meet to many theist who believe God exists without stating that they know. Most of them say they know, that is why they believe. Atheist, on the other hand, do not have the "know" in their equation only the belief. Which makes me curious as to why theist can make strong statements (and some logical) yet atheist (some) cannot do likewise, yet the other way around.

If a theist can know God exist and get away with this certainty, I am sure atheist should get away with their knowledge that he does not exist without being dishonest to themselves or confused.

My opinion.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This was not a divine decision. It was a political decision.

Nice. I have to agree.

 

[leibowde84]

That kind of puts a tilt on the other side. A theist can't say "God Does exist", he can only say he believes or have faith. I don't meet to many theist who believe God exists without stating that they know. Most of them say they know, that is why they believe. Atheist, on the other hand, do not have the "know" in their equation only the belief. Which makes me curious as to why theist can make strong statements (and some logical) yet atheist (some) cannot do likewise, yet the other way around.

If a theist can know God exist and get away with this certainty, I am sure atheist should get away with their knowledge that he does not exist without being dishonest to themselves or confused.

My opinion.

God exists = a positive assertion
God does not exist = a negative assertion

A negative assertion (or "proving a negative") is, logically speaking, a lot more difficult than proving a positive claim, assuming that it is even possible. That might be why you are noticing this distinction.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

God exists = a positive assertion
God does not exist = a negative assertion

A negative assertion (or "proving a negative") is, logically speaking, a lot more difficult than proving a positive claim, assuming that it is even possible. That might be why you are noticing this distinction.

Here is the problem. Just because the theist makes the claim God does exist doesn't mean He originally does. Rather, they (atheists) are proving that nothing existed in the first place and theists are making up something or someone who is not there. So it's not proving something exist wrong. It's saying, nothing was there in the first place.

 

[leibowde84]

Here is the problem. Just because the theist makes the claim God does exist doesn't mean He originally does. Rather, they (atheists) are proving that nothing existed in the first place and theists are making up something or someone who is not there. So it's not proving something exist wrong. It's saying, nothing was there in the first place.

Why do you think that a lack of God means a lack of everything. This is a common mistake made by theists. That it is either that there was nothing, or that there was God. There are presumably an endless amount of possibilities that we aren't aware of yet. I find limiting atheists to the notion that there is nothing outside of the material world, or worse, that something came from nothing. While I'm sure there are a few atheists who believe this, they surely don't claim to "know" it.

Keep in mind, "atheism" merely requires a "lack of belief in God". It does not require an active belief that God does not, or worse yet, cannot exist.

 

[leibowde84]

That kind of puts a tilt on the other side. A theist can't say "God Does exist", he can only say he believes or have faith. I don't meet to many theist who believe God exists without stating that they know. Most of them say they know, that is why they believe. Atheist, on the other hand, do not have the "know" in their equation only the belief. Which makes me curious as to why theist can make strong statements (and some logical) yet atheist (some) cannot do likewise, yet the other way around.

If a theist can know God exist and get away with this certainty, I am sure atheist should get away with their knowledge that he does not exist without being dishonest to themselves or confused.

My opinion.

They can say that they know, but in actuality, no one does.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Why do you think that a lack of God means a lack of everything. This is a common mistake made by theists. That it is either that there was nothing, or that there was God. There are presumably an endless amount of possibilities that we aren't aware of yet. I find limiting atheists to the notion that there is nothing outside of the material world, or worse, that something came from nothing. While I'm sure there are a few atheists who believe this, they surely don't claim to "know" it.

Keep in mind, "atheism" merely requires a "lack of belief in God". It does not require an active belief that God does not, or worse yet, cannot exist.

Here is the thing. I am an atheist. I know God does not exist. I see a lot of evidence that God is a man-made concept, idea, or personification of life that logically explains the purpose of our existence to people who use this to help them in life.

I also know that, because no God exist, theist can only make a claim not a certainty. What makes me so curious is that some theist do not agree that what they say are claims, beliefs, and faith but instead, say they are fact and truth. If a theist can say what they believe is not truth in general; that, would be rare.

Also, because no God exists, of course, the default would be nothing. If I have no pencil in my hand until I claim one is in my hand, my hand will be empty. Once I make a claim that a pencil is in my hand (although empty), any other atheist can disprove it all they want. What they are doing is disproving "claims, ideas, theories, and stories." They are not disproving a fact. There is no pencil. You can't disprove nothing. It is a default before anyone can claim or give me a literal pencil.

So, if there is a God then atheist have a logical reason to disprove or "dis'belief'" in whatever the theist claims. Until then, it's all empty. I was just curious if people know God exist or doesn't exist compared to others who say they believe they know or don't know. The former pair does not leave room for anything to exist. The latter pair, it does regardless of belief.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Why do you think that a lack of God means a lack of everything. This is a common mistake made by theists. That it is either that there was nothing, or that there was God. There are presumably an endless amount of possibilities that we aren't aware of yet. I find limiting atheists to the notion that there is nothing outside of the material world, or worse, that something came from nothing. While I'm sure there are a few atheists who believe this, they surely don't claim to "know" it.

You don't have to assert that there's nothing but the material world to assert that if a god doesn't have effects on the physical world, it doesn't exist:

- a god is an object of human worship. If a thing isn't known to humanity, then it can't be worshipped by humanity. If it isn't worshipped by humanity, it isn't a god.

- a god is relevant to humanity in some way. A god that may as well not exist is irrelevant and therefore not a god.

There may very well be all sorts of stuff out beyond the limits of our perception, but all of it's utterly unknown to us and therefore ineligible to be the "god" or "God" that anyone has ever referred to.

 

[Baladas]

I voted: No, I believe He does not exist. It's been quite some time since I believed in Yahweh.
I do however believe that every spiritual tradition is pointing to "something" that does.

 

[leibowde84]

Here is the thing. I am an atheist. I know God does not exist. I see a lot of evidence that God is a man-made concept, idea, or personification of life that logically explains the purpose of our existence to people who use this to help them in life.

I also know that, because no God exist, theist can only make a claim not a certainty. What makes me so curious is that some theist do not agree that what they say are claims, beliefs, and faith but instead, say they are fact and truth. If a theist can say what they believe is not truth in general; that, would be rare.

Also, because no God exists, of course, the default would be nothing. If I have no pencil in my hand until I claim one is in my hand, my hand will be empty. Once I make a claim that a pencil is in my hand (although empty), any other atheist can disprove it all they want. What they are doing is disproving "claims, ideas, theories, and stories." They are not disproving a fact. There is no pencil. You can't disprove nothing. It is a default before anyone can claim or give me a literal pencil.

So, if there is a God then atheist have a logical reason to disprove or "dis'belief'" in whatever the theist claims. Until then, it's all empty. I was just curious if people know God exist or doesn't exist compared to others who say they believe they know or don't know. The former pair does not leave room for anything to exist. The latter pair, it does regardless of belief.

Your example shows my point. When you say you have no pencil, the assumption should not be that you have nothing. There is a seemingly endless among of possibilities for things you could have in your hand. Just no pencil.

The rest I agree with.

 

[leibowde84]

You don't have to assert that there's nothing but the material world to assert that if a god doesn't have effects on the physical world, it doesn't exist:

- a god is an object of human worship. If a thing isn't known to humanity, then it can't be worshipped by humanity. If it isn't worshipped by humanity, it isn't a god.

- a god is relevant to humanity in some way. A god that may as well not exist is irrelevant and therefore not a god.

There may very well be all sorts of stuff out beyond the limits of our perception, but all of it's utterly unknown to us and therefore ineligible to be the "god" or "God" that anyone has ever referred to.

That is circular logic. You are assuming that God is merely a concept. Maybe our concept of what God is happens to be wrong.

 

[`mud]

There are millions of people out there that 'believe' in some 'GOD'.
None of them can prove their beliefs are true.
There are millions of people out there that 'believe' there are no 'GODS'.
None of them can prove their beliefs are true.
There are millions of people out there that have no proof of the existance of 'GODS'.
Like I said earlier: "One can't prove the belief to be true, nor the existance of 'GODS'."
Beliefs don't prove existance, nor do the words of mankind.
The 'GODS' don't write much, do they ?
NuffStuff
~
'mud

 

[leibowde84]

There are millions of people out there that 'believe' in some 'GOD'.
None of them can prove their beliefs are true.
There are millions of people out there that 'believe' there are no 'GODS'.
None of them can prove their beliefs are true.
There are millions of people out there that have no proof of the existance of 'GODS'.
Like I said earlier: "One can't prove the belief to be true, nor the existance of 'GODS'."
Beliefs don't prove existance, nor do the words of mankind.
The 'GODS' don't write much, do they ?
NuffStuff
~
'mud

Couldn't agree with you more. Thus, no one knows whether God does or does not exist. No matter whether they erroneously claim otherwise.