Athiests: Prove that God dosen't exist

[mrhenrik]

One thing you’ll never know is what they would have been like if they were raised in a Christian home. They may be “great people” now, without having a connection with God, but who would they have become if they did know Him?

CS Lewis says that connection with God expands our humanity. It makes us more fully ourselves. It leads us into reaching our potential. Just as Jesus says, “The only way to the father is through me.” The only way to see our true identity and potential is through Him (again, just my experience and some words from Lewis).

You know your friends as they were developed without being dedicated to God. He was and is dedicated to them already, so they became the “great people” they became despite their rejection of Him. Who would they have become if they had cooperated with God as He shaped them.

You may never know.

In that sense, shouldn’t those who “knew” god be greater than those who didn’t? Surely I cannot see this in my life. It’s not that they are worse, but if it was this way there should be some way to set them apart.

What I always disliked about christianity and especially the branches which are very big on the Bible, is that there’s a lot of over-interpretation going on. For instance, “The only way to the father is through me” does not mention true identity and potential, he says if you want to know my dad you need to talk to me.

Why is it that those who are dedicated to god do not stand out compared to those who aren’t, then? I know many atheists who are great people, and I know a lot of christians who are good people. There seems to be a 50-50 thing going on.

 

[Libertarian_FL]

I love the way Athiests love ducking a scientific arguement for some sort of diety, note I can say which is right by this arguement but here it goes.

1. Contemporary physics has demonstrated in strongly positioned theories, using the evidence, that alternative universes are possible. I admit not proven this is new, modeling that fit the evidence that they have but cannot as of yet be tested. But I will note Black Holes were thought purely a construct that should be there until science found the means to show they are real. In fact they seem to be necessary as all large galaxies seem to have one in the center. So I would say humanity is not at the level yet to prove this.
2. Assuming one is taken as true then we cannot at this time determine how many alternate universes and realities there are, logic dictates however these very well could be near infinite and constantly expanding as very probable.
3. So taking the odds of say to debate a trillion trillion universes at least exist ONE diety figure or more were not created in this process.

I would argue it would be just on the basic numbers borderline impossible there are no dieties ,at least one and very likely more, unless your willing to dismiss the work of a good number of brilliant minds working in areas like Quantum Physics?

Note I’m not defending the Christian viewpoint I feel strongly there are many dieties in the cosmos even bizarre ones depending on the reality your in, but I can say by the evidence and logic. That at least one diety must exist if the multiverse exists as clearly shown by science in the models there great minds are working on. Far wiser that I am in such things.

 

[1holycatholic]

You are asking us to provide a logical fallacy through the use of an argument based on negative evidence.

In declaring the universal negative"there is no God" atheism is a logical fallacy.

We say that since you are the one making an outrageous claim, the existence of something that cannot be seen, heard, or felt (tactilely) that the burden of proof falls firmly on you.

The problem here is that you don’t want to hear that you are asking an illogical question.

No amount of scientism is going to help your unsound arguments.

 

[aileron]

In declaring the universal negative"there is no God" atheism is a logical fallacy.

It is an urban legend of sorts that a universal negative is impossible to disprove.

There are no square circles. Would you like the proof of that conclusion?

 

[1holycatholic]

It is an urban legend of sorts that a universal negative is impossible to disprove.

There are no square circles. Would you like the proof of that conclusion?

A fallacy does not a universal negative make.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Off topic. This thread is about atheists proving God dosen’t exist.

This person by saying he/she is atheist is telling the world how little they know about religion and faith and is doing a very good job,keep up the good work

 

[a_priori]

Attempting a “proof” when considering an infinite “being” who “exists” outside of space and time is a fool’s errand.

 

[swplan76]

In that sense, shouldn’t those who “knew” god be greater than those who didn’t? Surely I cannot see this in my life. It’s not that they are worse, but if it was this way there should be some way to set them apart.

What I always disliked about christianity and especially the branches which are very big on the Bible, is that there’s a lot of over-interpretation going on. For instance, “The only way to the father is through me” does not mention true identity and potential, he says if you want to know my dad you need to talk to me.

Why is it that those who are dedicated to god do not stand out compared to those who aren’t, then? I know many atheists who are great people, and I know a lot of christians who are good people. There seems to be a 50-50 thing going on.

What makes it difficult is that you don’t know the person the Christians you know would be if they were not Christian. Conversely, you don’t know the people the non-Christians would be if they were Christians. Jesus makes people healthier on all kinds of levels. I think we take for granted all the beautiful things that has resulted from living in a Christian culture. We don’t know what life would have been like if Christianity some how never took shape, or if Hinduism took over the entire planet. We don’t know. I do believe that the people you know who are Christians are better versions of who they would have been had they not encountered Christ.

true identity and potential are ideas that come from other passages and study I have been doing.

 

[cheese_sdc]

A fallacy does not a universal negative make.

What is the fallacy of saying “God does not exist.”?

 

[Bill_Pick]

I have no idea if it is lying and theft going on, or plagiarism either.

So, I can not say anything about it.

Was it Geo Patton that said he never seen a atheist in a foxhole in his live==============

 

[Nebogipfel]

You’re right, I cannot prove that God does not exist, I just can’t make a world in which your conception of God does exist make more sense than one that doesn’t.

Nice job of poisoning the well, though. What proof would you accept as not being an “emotional argument”?

 

[Nebogipfel]

Atheism,

…is just not believing in God, a god or gods, so has nothing to do with being an animal or being chained to ones impulses, or dying unloved. But still…

“The stark acceptance that man is an animal,

Yes, we humans are animals. So are dogs, cats, horses, whales and dolphins. I don’t see any shame in being an animal.

chained to his impulses,

I can’t think of any way in which I am “chained” to my impulses. Are you chained to your impulses.

that he is born of accidental copulation

From what my parents have told me, the copulation which resulted in me was far from an accident.

and dies unloved

You think that God is the only person who loves you? That is a depressing thought. I can think of at least five people who love me, even though I am frequently unworthy of their love. Even if the worst happens and I outlive all of them, I will still remember their love. Dying unloved is one of the last things I’m worried about.

is a truly awful vista.

Well it would be, if it was anything like that.

I find it difficult to comprehend why proselytising for such a miserable view of life excites so many irrespective of the truth or otherwise of the disharmony that results from this perspective.”

You - or whoever you are quoting - need to talk to some actual atheists…

 

[Nebogipfel]

I personally can’t understand how atheists can face each day. I’m not trying to be rude, I just don’t see how that kind of life makes sense. As I have been a Christian, my need for God has just increased.

I have heard several Christians - Catholic and otherwise - express the opinion that they and every other human being that has ever lived deserves nothing more that eternal pain and punishment in Hell. I personally can’t understand how they face each day with such an attitude.

 

[a_priori]

Attempting a “proof” when considering an infinite “being” who “exists” outside of space and time is a fool’s errand.

Having said that, the Bible says that a “fool says in his heart that there is no God.” It’s like the old saying, if you believe, no proof is necessary and if you don’t believe, no proof is possible.

 

[mrhenrik]

Having said that, the Bible says that a “fool says in his heart that there is no God.” It’s like the old saying, if you believe, no proof is necessary and if you don’t believe, no proof is possible.

Regardless, there is no proof.

 

[Eucharisted]

Regardless, there is no proof.

Prove it.

 

[mrhenrik]

Prove it.

How do you prove a lack of proof? Give me an example. For instance, for the sake of discussion I will claim that dinosaurs still exist. I show no proof, but claim that it exists. How do you prove that they don’t?

 

[a_priori]

Regardless, there is no proof.

This is circular. Of course there is no proof. We are left, I would submit, with two options. One is an impersonal, purely mechanical, preexisting singularity of energy from infinity past that we cannot understand. The other is an infinite, personal God existing from eternity past who we cannot understand.

It’s either “In the beginning God…” or “In the beginning a singularity…”. I would argue that the former makes more sense intellectually when neither one can be understood by man’s finite frame of reference. You’re correct though. It’s not about proof. Never was.

 

[mrhenrik]

This is circular. Of course there is no proof. We are left, I would submit, with two options. One is an impersonal, purely mechanical, preexisting singularity of energy from infinity past that we cannot understand. The other is an infinite, personal God existing from eternity past who we cannot understand.

It’s either “In the beginning God…” or “In the beginning a singularity…”. I would argue that the former makes more sense intellectually when neither one can be understood by man’s finite frame of reference. You’re correct though. It’s not about proof. Never was.

The sentences “In the beginning God…” and “In the beginning a singularity…” (assuming there is a beginning) are rather equal presented as they are here, but it is when you start adding other traits to god besides infinity that the latter becomes more logically attractive for me. It is not entirely impossible that for instance the big bang could’ve been initiated by a force named god, but it is much less likely that this same force also watches over us, reads our minds and even has a conciousness.

I’m by no means trying to offend anyone here and I apologize if I do. I’ve learned a lot of different views since I came to these forums, something I appreciate a lot. :tiphat:

 

[aileron]

A fallacy does not a universal negative make.

Indulge me. Explain why you think this is a fallacy.