If it could be proved no god exists

[Jedster]

I would still practice Judaism. Loving my neighbor as myself is still the best possible life. The Torah tells us not just that God exists, but who we are as a People. Even without God, I would still be a Jew.

Interesting you should mention this.
I used to live for a short time, in mea shearim (Jerusalem) which is an extremely orthodox Jewish street/area.
One morning, I was talking with some of the Hasidim there(black hats, peots etc), when one of them said he was an atheist.
I was really shocked and asked why he lived, what seemed to me, an extremely difficult life, keeping all those mitzvot, every day.
He said that he just loved that way of life. Period.

This also reminds me of another person who went thru an orthodox conversion, which took several years. I asked if during that time if she was ever asked(by the Rabbonim) if she believed in God(which incidentally she did) and she said no. It was always about observance/how she was living.

 

[PruePhillip]

How very arrogant of you!
Who are you to assert that you KNOW what God does or does not want? Even your Ballulah only knew what God wanted him to know.

He's talking about "faith."
In the bible faith can do a work in people's lives.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You meant IMHO! It's "pariedolia" that the Jews were scattered to many lands, persecuted in each, returned to their land, defeated their enemies?

No, it's pareidolia to believe that it was prophesied.

Quick, name a people scattered for 2500 years who retained their language and faith then got their nation back?

The Celts.

What are you talking about?

 

[Kenny]

The comment about the Trinity was just one example of the 1000 different conceptualizations of what God is. Among Christians, some believe in a TriGod, some a dual-god, some ignore the OT and just consider Jesus. All as different as Atlas and Allah.

You Christians all have different ways to worship your different versions. It is not one big glorified Christianity. It is 1000's of sects all claiming to be the Real Christianity.

It is apparent you don't understand Christianity.

 

[LuisDantas]

There are two creations in Genesis, and not the two people normally think of.

1 - "God created the heavens ...... and the earth"
in that order.

2 - We are then transported to the dark and sterile ocean of the early earth and
given the sequence of events which led to man - which accords with science
but written in theological language.

Number 1 should be broken down into
1 - God created the heavens

Because that's fundamentally different than creating the earth. The building
blocks for the earth were a part of the "heavens", ie hydrogen and the "metals"
plus the laws of physics, ie gravity.

BUT THERE WERE NO BUILDING BLOCKS AND NO PHYSICAL LAWS
FOR THE CREATION OF THE "HEAVENS."
IT JUST "HAPPENED" WITHOUT THESE.

And this is where the "magic" comes from. Science says (without proof
or evidence) that "there is no reason for our being. It just happened." Only,
how could the universe spring into existence without a reason? Science
says that all phenomena has a reason for doing what it does. But that the
First phenomena "had no reason."

Some scientists say that you just "don't think about this" but I find the
whole process intellectually dishonest.
I am happy if someone says that "M theory" of hyperspace membranes
can explain the Big Bang. But the Big Bang isn't the issue, it's existence
itself - and that's fundamentally different than the Big Bang because its
obvious this "singularity" was a physical entity, acted upon by physical
laws - so "something" was here before the Big Bang to cause it.

It's that first "something" that is the philosophical problem. Not a science
problem.

You are misrepresenting science.

 

[Trailblazer]

When you talk about things like God "hiding," you're talking about evidence.

What God hides is His Essence, but God does not hide the fact that He exists since He reveals Himself through His Messengers in every age.

My comment wasn't about you, but I'd say that's a pretty vague definition of God.

I was in a hurry because I had to get to work so I just grabbed that passage. There are many more passages in the Writings of Baha’u’llah that describe God in more detail and they are anything but vague.

If the god-concept isn't fleshed out enough for us to say "God's existence implies (list of things we could conceivably test), so if those things aren't there, then this would imply that God does not exist," then it's not the sort of belief that is well-defined enough to evaluate in terms of "true" or "false." That's the sort of god-concept I'm talking about when I say it isn't even good enough to be wrong.

We cannot test anything that points to God’s existence, but logically speaking that does not mean God does not exist, since there is no reason to think that God’s actions would be testable.

If God was testable God could be proven to exist, but God cannot ever be proven to exist. Individuals can prove to themselves that God exists, but God cannot even be proven as a fact.

 

[Trailblazer]

You know, you are telling me outright that you believe that a God that I can't possibly find either likely to exist nor worth of any attention is the One True God.

He is to me but I fully understand that He isn’t to you.

That just shows how differently we think but that’s okay by me. We are all flowers in the same garden of humanity, just different colored flowers.

Sorry if I offended you.

 

[Trailblazer]

Which God?

Do we really need to prove Atlas does not exist?
Do we really need to prove Osanyin does not exist?
Do we really need to prove Psychic Snowflakes do not exist?

“I believe” there is only one true God. We cannot prove He exists or does not exist.

We cannot prove any of those other gods do not exist either because we cannot prove a negative.

 

[Trailblazer]

How very arrogant of you!
Who are you to assert that you KNOW what God does or does not want? Even your Ballulah only knew what God wanted him to know.

What I said was based upon logic, NOT upon anything Baha’u’llah wrote.

I mean if an omnipotent God wanted us to have proof then He could provide proof, so I deduce that God does not want us to have proof.

Also, we know from the Bible that God wants us to have faith, and faith and proof are opposites.

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

 

[LuisDantas]

He is to me but I fully understand that He isn’t to you.

That just shows how differently we think but that’s okay by me. We are all flowers in the same garden of humanity, just different colored flowers.

Sorry if I offended you.

You didn't. But I do find myself in a delicate situation when faced with such claims.

 

[Trailblazer]

You didn't. But I do find myself in a delicate situation when faced with such claims.

I think I understand.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think I understand.

That would be a surprise, but who knows.

 

[Trailblazer]

That would be a surprise, but who knows.

I don't think anyone can completely understand how another person feels, but I listen and try because I care.

 

[PruePhillip]

You are misrepresenting science.

You say that, but then.... don't say how.

 

[MJFlores]

Nope... your lack of evidence that there was nothing does not automatically mean there was something. However, your lack of evidence that there was nothing makes your entire claim completely useless. It's JUST as useless as ME claiming that there has ALWAYS been something, without any evidence. It's really not that hard a concept to grasp.

How blissful you must be.

I truly respect your opinions but we should try to place ourselves on the original post's "what if scenario".
According to the topic starter, what would become if it could be proved no god exists.

To me people will still continue to find their origins
They will form theories and other concepts
They will sound foolish
Probably there will be plenty of I.D.K or missing links
Simply because they couldn't piece together the ultimate reality
That nothing cannot produce something
That chaos cannot produce order

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You have completely missed my point.

But that's ok.

There wasn't much in your post that could have been misunderstood.

Clearly, you hold to the warped beleif that if people stop believing in god, they become a bunch of immoral (or amoral) psychopaths that run around killing and raping everybody.

It's quite ridiculous and completely detached from reality.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

"We don't know"
What we know are:

1. We just exists
   
2. Nobody made us
3. Nothing made us

False dichotomies aren't going to be helpfull either.

I'm toying around the Original Post
Assuming it is proven that no god exists
So, I've been thinking and what do you think?
We would have plenty of "IDK" or I don't know.
Maybe someone would come out of the blue, just like that with no reason whatsoever.
That would be fantastic right?

No idea what your point is. This seems like a very incoherent paragraphe.

Sure we could play I don't know.

"play"?
What strange choice of words...

But assuming someone said it was proven that no god exists
then that person knows your I don't know

False and a common mistake among fundamentalist creationists.
Disproving X, ONLY disproves X. You still don't know.

When X is proposed as explanation of some phenomenon and X is subsequently disproven, then the phenomenon still has no supported/confirmed explanation.

Disproving an idea does not, in any way, lend credence to alternative ideas.

Then there was something or someone?

We don't know. If you are going to claim to know, then you are going to be asked to support your claim.

If I don't have evidence that in the beginning there was ever nothing?

Then you can't justify that claim. You should not make (or believe) claims you can't justify/

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Do you have any evidence of that, or is it just a personal opinion?

The evidence in support of that statement, is the complete lack of evidence in support of god(s).

Obviously, if X doesn't exist then we don't expect to find any evidence of X.

Can you prove that unicorns don't exist? Nope.
But still we say they don't exist. Can we know this for certain? Nope.
So on what do we base that then? Simple: on the complete lack of verifiable evidence support of unicorns.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If God could be proven to NOT exist, I think it would be catastrophic for believers who love God and depend upon Him for stuff. Does that make more sense now?

No, I don't think it makes sense.

Given the hypothetical that god has been definatly disproven, then it doesn't make much sense to say that people were "depending on god for stuff". You can't depend on a thing that doesn't exist - and certainly not "for stuff". So if god is demonstrated to be non-existant, it means that all this time, they have been depending on something else in reality.

So there's no reason why they couldn't continue to depend on that actual thing moving forward.

 

[PruePhillip]

I truly respect your opinions
That nothing cannot produce something

nothing cannot produce something

We are not talking about dark energy creating something
or the vacuum inflating
or order coming out of chaos

... because there was no energy, no vacuum and no chaos.

What does the inflating universe "push into"??
nothing.
The same nothing that existed before physics, or numbers....
This sort of nothing lies outside of science. Therefore the
existence of the universe lies outside of science.