Prove that God does not exist?

I think this is a good question, it is funny how Christians are said to not be able to give a straight answer here a lot of the time, but no one else seems to want to give one for this question either.

To answer it, I can't.

But, to be fair, I can't prove He does exists either. But that is not one's job. It's their job to show Jesus through the Bible (if allowed) and through the way they act and talk etc...and then it is up to the person, and the Holy Spirit (according to my faith).

And also to be fair, atheists are not the only people in search of proof of God's existance (or disproof).

Science in my eyes proves the "how" but it doesn't offer the "why" reason. I believe in God, paranormal and many other aspects of life that cannot be proved rationally. However it seems all too convinient that we are here on this planet with the right air to breathe, all life on earth has a purpose and our bodies function just like a machine. There is no proof that God actually exists but none of the experts can disprove God either. It is all a matter of belief and I do think a lot more people believe in God or some superior being than they care to admit. If you look at the ancient world, why did the majority of them worship the sun? They had a lot of similarities with each other, ie Egyptian and Mayan pyramids .etc., that whole human sacrifice thing and so many other aspects. There appeared to be an idea of some kind of God or deity even back then and that idea hasn't really altered just perceptions and ideas have changed. The real truth is that none of us will really know until we die.

Academic arrogance. Also the scientific method is supposed to be based on proving the existence of something, that's why so many skeptics think they have a leg to stand on. I don't know why "atheists" are so adamant and obsessed with Christianity, obsessions are usually based on some past experience or trauma. And if they are all on a side together, then that seems like its own religion/group/clique/political party.Real science is so much more than the scientific method, otherwise there would never be any hypotheses or theories based on things that can't be proven, Einstein reached for things that no one ever heard of or believed in. That's real science. And since science and religion are not even the same discussion, I really don't get why either "side" has to prove anything, except that some people really get off on trying to make themselves appear intelligent by trying to disprove everything that someone else says.

danny, science is not scientists

you mean scientists

science is simply the universal rules, the information is always there

all it takes is scientists, or people, to find it

and they have not found it all yet

thats the issue

the important part of proving god, is in proving he DOES exist not that he does not

if you have no evidence for something, it is then a given that it does not exist

,until you do have the evidence

any evidence, just one shred of it,

one logical scientifically sound theory for god would prove his existence to be possible

but this has not happened, there has been no evidence, not one tiny piece, no logically sound theorys that back up gods existence

nothing

so, logic dictates that god does not exist until this is so

however, the fact that peopel believe he DOES exists with the SAME lack of evidence is the exact same argument

2 sides of the same issue

one

decides lack of evidence means god does not exist and beleive he does not

the other

decides lack of evidence does not mean god not exist and beleive he does

ive never asked for proof of the amount of grains of sand

and ive never seen any other atheist ask that on here

scientists will inevitably find a cure to aids, if there is a cure to be found, if not then it will not be found will it

------Additional

-------ridiculous questions?

have you looked at my question list?

there is at the most 2 that you would probably class as ridiculous,

maybe more depending on your perspective,

but i asked them with intent of finding answers, hearing thoughts and opinions

and have you bothered to take note of all the other groups and labels ridiculous questions are are you another who purely focuses your concern and attention towards atheists?

no one can "prove" all of lifes origin

if your truly looking for this then your looking for the impossible, at this moment

you can get the standard reply, and answer, which is the only real scientific theory, youll get from anyone "educated" or not

you dont want opinions then why come to a q/a site that is full of opinions to ask a question?

why not go do some research , ask a scientist, ask a lecturer, not here where all opinions ARE answers

and all answers are opinions

Let's step back for a minute and look at the big picture:

Science is a method of searching for truth not an answer book.

To borrow from Immanuel Kant, science is organized knowledge, wisdom is organized life.

Scientists, biologists ("evolutionists"), and many atheists believe that science is the definition of knowledge -- what we know about our world -- and that it is the primary building block of wisdom. As such, they tend to agree that "other information" may define wisdom, but if it directly conflicts with knowledge (science) it isn't likely to be true. In other words, something may be useful or good and therefore a part of wisdom but it isn't knowledge. Many people see "lifes biggest questions" as a priori beyond the realm of sceince and, therefore, exclusively in the realm of wisdom.

I disagree with this point of view, but that isn't relevant at this juncture.

My point to you is twofold:

First, what is the relevance of science from your point of view. Is science organized knowledge? Does science as knowledge have the power to weigh in on questions of both the metaphysical and wisdom? Do you accept the rules and practice of science as the playing field of proof and evidence?

Second, what is your alternative? If science cannot weigh in on the metaphysical, how do you propose proof and evidence be judged?

I will conclude with a direct answer to your question: you misunderstand science. No educated biologist or scientist is going to attempt to prove all of life's origin: not in the way you mean. That isn't what sceince is for. Science is about understanding and organizing what we know about the world around us.

Further, you are simply assuming that life has an "ultimate origin." That is, you assume such a thing exists because you have been taught to think that there is. That isn't proof. Like the existence of God, the theory that an ultimate origin of life exists has to be proven to be said to be true. Without proof -- the theory fails as a theory and returns to a simple assumption.

The boundaries between organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, and life are far more delicate and insubstancial than you think. What makes a living thing alive is amazing, but it is far short of the breath of God. A simple chemical reaction will do.

Science answer's the "how" questions. How we got here, what are our origins? Science can't answer the "why" question, that is up to the individual. Most people just use god as the answer to why, for myself I say because we are matter evolved into consciousness. We are lucky, not by design but my sheer chance and that is very cool.

And as for the grains of sand thought, there are more stars in the universe then there are grains of sands on the Earth.

i'm in basic terms someone with constrained perceptions, merely like all human beings else. I believe God does exist, yet not in any anthropomorphic sense that could be waiting to be shown or measured scientifically. This being the main probable clarification for the a protracted time previous debate, I end that i won't supply any gratifying answer that could convince you the two way.

thats a bit stupid saying science cant cure AIDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

science can cure anything, but its finding WHAT can cure it that takes time money and rescources. Science has found cures for LOOOAAADDDSSSS of things. and eventually one day, there will be a cure for things like AIDS and Cancer. u cannot compare athesists not believing in god for this?

Athesists dont have to prove god doesnt exist, because the proof is all around. In the bible it says to pray to god, and god will give you what u ask for. Well if i pray for a tramp on the street to win 10,000 will he??????? No of course not!!!!!!!!!!

its YOU who has to prove he DOES exist! Maybe if you had some vaild proof or at least a plausable theory, you might persuade me to start believing!!

Science can't prove negatives. Okay? This is literally the millionth time some idiot comes out of the woodwork all aggressive and challenging without realising you can't prove conclusively that leprechauns don't exist. But somehow, most people seem to think they don't exist anyway.

The sheer absence of evidence for your and all of the thousands of gods in human history is telling, though.

If one can prove that Danny V the cat does not exist, then one can proof that the God of Danny V the cat does not exist.

So, is Danny V the cat exist in reality or exist only in the virtual reality of the forum ?