Who can prove to me god does not exist?

reply to post by TheAmused


Can you prove it does? common a picture, a paper sign with his name, a TV interview, you can do better than that.

reply to post by lordtyp0


i do not have my mind made up trust me.
My wife call's me a atheist.

Yet other's think im religious lol

basically i am on a wire..

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by TheAmused

 

Can you prove it does? common a picture, a paper sign with his name, a TV interview, you can do better than that.

why would i have to prove it does?
Remember i asked the simple question
Who can prove to me god does not exist?

i have no idea mate.
i got a opinion ...but opinion's are like arsehole's we all have one...right?

Originally posted by TheAmused
reply to post by lordtyp0

 

i do not have my mind made up trust me.
My wife call's me a atheist.

Yet other's think im religious lol

basically i am on a wire..

Why?
Seems like you either have the warm fuzzies when you pray, or you see it as a waste of time.
Why not just be someone who can't see logical merit in anything religious but hopes there is more after death.. and live life as a decent human being?

Otherwise, I am sure a catholic priest is close to an atheist in the eyes of a southern baptist. Likewise someone with a oija game in the garage is a member of the faithful to a militant atheist.

Originally posted by TheAmused
but my disillusion is my downfall as you say.
Yet i saw no clear answer from you to prove god doesn't exist.
cause to be honest that is the question.

It's not my burden to prove a negative.

Prove to me that a pink elephant orbiting an asteroid doesn't control the universe.

Same dilemma.

Do you want a likely false answer just to satisfy your need to know something or do you want to know the truth about origins?

reply to post by TheAmused


You completely miss the irony of my post,

nobody can prove the none existence of god any more than they can prove it.

That is the moral lesson.

[edit on 24-6-2010 by marg6043]

reply to post by traditionaldrummer



The burden of proof lies on both parties. You can't just say there is no evidence for his existence therefor that's proof for his non-existence. Non believers have to prove he is not real by explaining what did happen. And either way you look at it the question is what was the spark that tipped over the first domino? Neither side really has a definite answer yet. But by saying the burden of proof lies with the other party you give yourself a reason to stop searching for what really happened. Thats just lazy.lol

[edit on 24-6-2010 by ScRuFFy63]

off course god exists, god is what created this universe

but that doesnt mean God is a person or even cares about planet earth

god is probably an event that happened to create our universe

and what is god's god ... who knows ... I am just saying, something created this universe, and that something is called God in my opinion

the real problem is that people, instead of thinking how, they just prefer to imagine a man in the sky ... thats $¨¨&#@

Seems to me that the burden of proof should be on those who believe in a pre-stone age fable to prove it does exist.

Originally posted by TheAmused

Let's say evolution is true for argument sake.

Evolution is proven to be a true process. However, it doesn't disprove god. Logic tends to suggest it is impossible to prove that something doesn't exist...think about it - how do you prove something DOES exist? You find proof right? How do you find proof for something not existing....?

Religious lies can easily be proved wrong but god (in whatever form) will never be disproved because it is completely impossible.

[edit on 24-6-2010 by Frakkerface]

reply to post by TheAmused

Originally posted by TheAmused
i figured at least 1 million atheist's would have been trying to brow beat me by now lol
go figure lol

So you came and posted this thread with the idea that it would cause a storm, that's tantamount to trolling - actually, that IS trolling. Reported

Edit to add:

Originally posted by TheAmused
reply to post by XyZeR

 

any god if it's the one that created everything we call life.

The emphasis on the word "We"....

Come on, think about it - it can't be an inclusive we, because some of us don't agree that he/she/it created life.

Tut tut.

[edit on 24/6/1010 by jokei]

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
Seems to me that the burden of proof should be on those who believe in a pre-stone age fable to prove it does exist.

That is disproving a particular religion's idea of god. Your argument provides a straw god. I guess that must make you feel better.

Originally posted by ScRuFFy63
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

The burden of proof lies on both parties. You can't just say there is no evidence for his existence therefor that's proof for his non-existence. Non believers have to prove he is not real by explaining what did happen. And either way you look at it the question is what was the spark that tipped over the first domino? Neither side really has a definite answer yet. But by saying the burden of proof lies with the other party you give yourself a reason to stop searching for what really happened. Thats just lazy.lol

[edit on 24-6-2010 by ScRuFFy63]

Incorrect. Those making a claim have the burden of proving that claim. It's that simple. People cannot go around dispelling any grandiose, unproven claim that anybody happens to dream up.

I have not once said that "there is no evidence for his existence therefore that's proof for his non-existence". I am open to evidence. I cannot, nor can anybody, disprove or debunk an unproven claim.

Originally posted by jokei
reply to post by TheAmused

 

Originally posted by TheAmused
i figured at least 1 million atheist's would have been trying to brow beat me by now lol
go figure lol

So you came and posted this thread with the idea that it would cause a storm, that's tantamount to trolling - actually, that IS trolling. Reported

lol name one thread asking for proof on the subject that doesn't get flooded with them.
reported for threatening im trolling

reply to post by TheAmused

can you prove to me god doesn't exist?

This thread is new and original. Surely no one has ever thought to discuss this topic.

Oh wait, I guess they have:

thread 1
thread 2
thread 3
thread 4
thread 5
thread 6
thread 7


[edit on 24-6-2010 by LordBucket]

Oh god, not this thread again!

ARRRRRRRRRRGH!

ARRRRRRRRRRGH!

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHH!

Ok, aneurysm over. Seriously, this thread is made at least 14 times a week.

Edit: LordBucket beat me to it.

[edit on 24-6-2010 by Whine Flu]

Religion doesn't require evidence to support it's claims, it relies on blind faith and nothing more. Religion is the one thing in which blind faith is applauded and considered an admirable trait to have...when it comes to everything else even the religious folks are a bit more rational, they would not consider blind faith a good trait to have in any other aspect of their lives.

[edit on 24-6-2010 by Solomons]

Originally posted by Frakkerface

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
Seems to me that the burden of proof should be on those who believe in a pre-stone age fable to prove it does exist.

That is disproving a particular religion's idea of god. Your argument provides a straw god. I guess that must make you feel better.

Ah, so the "one true god" is a straw god. That should make the fundies feel good. Because noone has any straw from more than 6000 years ago.

reply to post by TheAmused


"Threatening you're trolling" - sorry, can you explain that?

Your post implied you anticipated a furore' - and you seemingly welcome that, which is a little juvenille.

Originally posted by TheAmused
reply to post by lordtyp0

 

basically i am on a wire..

Maybe that's the sanest and most sensible place to be.

The bottom line is that there either is, or there isn't, a god.

If there is then it doesn't matter how elegant or logical are the arguments of atheists - they're plain wrong.

If there isn't then it doesn't matter how powerful is the faith and conviction of believers - they're simply deluded.

I suspect it's impossible for a pathetic little species like homo sapiens to be able to know for sure one way or the other. Anyone claiming to know for sure is displaying an arrogance way beyond their mental and spiritual capacity.

Probably best not to worry about it. There are probably more pressing problems to exercise our minds.