If it could be proved no god exists

[LuisDantas]

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

Not doing your homework. And it is your homework, make no mistake.

 

[PruePhillip]

Not doing your homework. And it is your homework, make no mistake.

Quote - "I am not doing your homework."

Can you give me a few of your excuses?

 

[Kenny]

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.

Even as human-trafficking continues it's uptick.

You have me convinced you are right.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Even as human-trafficking continues it's uptick.

You have me convinced you are right.

Right, because no god-fearing theist has ever engaged in human-trafficking, or other, much much worse, things

Also, are you saying that human traffickers are all atheists?

Come on, go the extra mile.
Tell us all where this continues an uptick? And how it is relevant to your previous statement?
And don't forget to back up your claims with evidence and proper statistics.

 

[Trailblazer]

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

There is so much evidence it is not even funny, the fact that atheists do not recognize the evidence AS evidence notwithstanding.

I never claimed that there is proof that God exists.
Evidence is not proof.

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:https://www.google.com/search

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement:https://www.google.com/search

 

[Trailblazer]

No, I don't think it makes sense.

Given the hypothetical that god has been definatly disproven,

Oh, when was God disproven? Sorry if I missed that.
You cannot prove a negative, in case you did not know that.

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.

No, they have been depending upon the God that exists, the God for which there is boatloads of evidence, even though there is no proof.

Something either exists or not. Proof does not make anything exist, proof is just what atheists want.

For example, if a man committed a murder and it could not be proven, that man still committed the murder....
It is the same with God, God can exist even though that can never be proven.

Obviously, God does not want us to be able to prove He exists as a fact, although we can prove that to ourselves.

 

[ecco]

It is apparent you don't understand Christianity.

Are you denying that there are thousands of Christian sects?
Are you denying that some Christians believe in the Trinity and others don't?

Don't duck and dodge. Just try answering.

 

[ecco]

“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.

Nonsense!

 

[ecco]

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.

You are just repeating your arrogant assertion that you know what God wanted.

What I said was based upon logic,

The logic of a puny human leads you to believe you know what God wants. That's ludicrous.



Would you care to apply your logic and explain why an omniscient God did not know that Adam would disobey him?

 

[ecco]

There is so much evidence it is not even funny, the fact that atheists do not recognize the evidence AS evidence notwithstanding.

Present some.

 

[MJFlores]

False dichotomies aren't going to be helpfull either.


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



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



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.



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



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

Maybe we can blame this to some phenomenon.

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.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

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

And I would assert that there is absolutely no reason to conclude that there was a "who" that "dunnit." You don't know this is the case, and I don't know that it is not the case. There is no evidence to support the proposition. "Complexity" isn't going to cut it as "evidence." Not even close.

 

[PruePhillip]

Present some.

The one's I already presented

1 - The history of the Jews as a metaphor of God's people, the Promised
Land, Exile, Captivity, Redemption, a people few in number -- all played out in history.

2 - the Genesis account.

3 - the failure of anyone to describe how something came from utterly nothing, or for
what reason.

4 - the way in which the above three points are glossed over, ignored, ridiculed
but never seriously addressed. This impresses me the most.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There is so much evidence it is not even funny

Yeah... many theists have claimed that. And whenever I ask for examples of such "evidence", all I get is hearsay and a piling on of more claims, as if claims can be supported by more claims.

Do you wish to give it a swing?
Save some time and go straight to your BEST and MOST CONVINCING piece of evidence.

, the fact that atheists do not recognize the evidence AS evidence notwithstanding.

I never claimed that there is proof that God exists.
Evidence is not proof.

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:https://www.google.com/search

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement:https://www.google.com/search

Not sure why you are saying this, as I didn't claim otherwise at all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Oh, when was God disproven? Sorry if I missed that.
You cannot prove a negative, in case you did not know that.

/facepalm...

I said: given the HYPOTHETICAL that god has been disproven.
Did you even read the OP? What is the subject of this thread?

Try to pay some attention....

No, they have been depending upon the God that exists, the God for which there is boatloads of evidence, even though there is no proof.

1. you have yet to share this evidence.
2. read the thread title, read the OP, learn what a hypothetical is

Something either exists or not. Proof does not make anything exist, proof is just what atheists want.
For example, if a man committed a murder and it could not be proven, that man still committed the murder....

But you can't know it. If you can't demonstrate that X murdered Y, then X is set free and ruled "not guilty".

It is the same with God, God can exist even though that can never be proven.

And the same goes for bigfoot, unicorns, the kraken, leprechauns, fairies, all other gods, etc.

Obviously, God does not want us to be able to prove He exists as a fact, although we can prove that to ourselves.

Either we can prove it or we can't. Make up your mind.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Maybe we can blame this to some phenomenon.

Once again, you make no sense.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The one's I already presented

1 - The history of the Jews as a metaphor of God's people, the Promised
Land, Exile, Captivity, Redemption, a people few in number -- all played out in history.

How is that evidence of a god? Doesn't follow.

2 - the Genesis account.

Those are the claims that are in need of evidence. So they can't be evidence of themselves. Circular reasoning.

3 - the failure of anyone to describe how something came from utterly nothing, or for
what reason.

Argument from ignorance/incredulity

4 - the way in which the above three points are glossed over, ignored, ridiculed
but never seriously addressed. This impresses me the most.

Yeah, what horror right? To actually not accept arguments that are textbook examples of logical fallacies? How dare they....

An assumed conclusion that doesn't follow (1), a circular argument (2) and an argument from ignorance/incredulity (3). That's the "evidence" you stated here. Good job.
And then you wonder in 4 why it isn't accepted.

 

[firedragon]

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:https://www.google.com/search

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement:https://www.google.com/search

This shows that you reading all your life doesn't mean you cant learn something everyday. I read about this difference I believe when I was in school and just starting to read some classics but have completely lost it.

Thanks for reminding. Its actually a big deal.

 

[QuestioningMind]

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

That nothing cannot produce something

STILL waiting for your evidence that there was ever NOTHING.

 

[ecco]

The one's I already presented

1 - The history of the Jews as a metaphor of God's people, the Promised
Land, Exile, Captivity, Redemption, a people few in number -- all played out in history.

Despite 100 years of Jewish and Christian research, there has not been found any evidence for the Exodus.

Stories from the bible may contain actual locations but those actual locations do not validate the bible. Harry Potter stories mention Kings Cross station. Do Harry Potter stories reflect reality? No.

2 - the Genesis account.

Nothing in the Genesis account is supported by any branches of science. The most verifiable thing in Genesis is the flood. There is no evidence of a worldwide flood - NONE! That, in and of itself, is enough to put lie to the entire Genesis story.

the way in which the above three points are glossed over, ignored, ridiculed
but never seriously addressed. This impresses me the most.

Nothing has been glossed over. Your alleged evidence has been seriously addressed. It has been evaluated by Christians and Jews. It has been found to be false.


You just don't like that nothing has been found to support your literalist interpretation of scripture. I'm sure you know that researchers have looked for evidence of the Exodus. So when you use terms like "glossed over" you are being dishonest.