HOW DO YOU PROVE THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST?

Think of this conversation

"Do I exist?"

"Yes, I can see you", I replied.

"What if you were blind, would I exist then?"

"Yes, I could hear you"

"What if you were blind and deaf, would I exist then?"

"Of course, I could feel you"

"What if you were blind, deaf and lost the sense of touch....Would I exist to you then?"

*****

Think about it. Would you exist to a person who was blind, deaf and lost their sense of touch and smell?

I think the same analogy works with people who refuse to believe in God. Because I know that God exists. People automatically say religions throughout history have made up Gods, but do they not understand that religion is man made. God knows no religion, God supersedes religions. God exists on a metaphysical level and people who shut their senses to this inner spiritual power obviously can't find God.

Hi there,

You are right that it is incredibly difficult to prove God does not exist.

Even if those who are atheist say that the world was Billions of years old (which I think it most definitely is) then that does not mean that a Creator God did not put the ball in motion and allow things to evolve.

Personally I find the idea of us evolving from fish to birds to humans and INCREDIBLE stretch of faith to believe.

As regards a spiritual realm beyond our capacity to see - I agree, it could exist, however just as one can feel the wind against our bodies IF and that is a big IF then surely we can experience its affects, if it did exist.

Don't you find it interesting that the Christian Bible talks about Faith being a requirement in accepting God/Jesus? That is implying that one cannot prove the existence of God. If one could prove the existence of God then one would not need faith and that would challenge the validity of the Bible.

If one stands back and listens to people talking about God and Jesus and the Christian faith you soon realize that a great deal of it is based on premises that have not been proven. For example the number of times you hear people saying that God told them to do this or that - when we know God (if there is a God) has never 'spoken' literally to anyone - what they are saying is that they have felt that it is God who is 'leading them' in their minds to go a certain way etc. If one was to actually hear God speak that woud be proof - next time you hear someone say God told them to do something ask them precisely how he communicated the instruction?

Read Romans 12: 1 and 2 - it is talking about conditioning the mind to think a certain way ... and then you will KNOW the will of God.

Well, if that turns it on for you then good luck to you but as far as I am concerned, after 60 years I have left that life behind me and am now an agnostic and an existentialist and IF there is a God, I do not believe he involves himself in the day to day running of the billions on earth - that is our responsibility to look after our own species.

Regards and look after yourself

Mike D

PS I just read Krystals example - If one was deaf, blind and lost the sense of touch then one would not know if there is a God or not - her example does not prove that simply because that person would not know of the existence of a God that a God DOES exist - very weak argument - proves nothing!!! All it does is leave the door open to say that a God/creator may exist ... and that is where I stand.

241011

I believe God knows no religion, because God is perfect, and religion is man made. The Greeks made up a religion, so did the Hindus, the Egyptians etc. But that does not mean they made up God.

You see there is no distinction between 'Zeus' or 'Amun" or "Krishna" or "Allah" or "God". These Gods were created by societies and humans who can't comprehend a transient God, so they create religion as a means of comprehending God, and achieving spiritual salvation.

But, to reject God, or anything for that matter, you must have a definition. Think in the shoes of theist and now define God. Don't think of God as a magical being up in the clouds, but on a metaphysical level, what is God?

From the perspective of a theist, God is powerful, right? God cannot be created nor destroyed, right? and God can transfer forms.

Now, go back and replace, in that sentence just above this, the word God with the word, 'Energy'.

See what I mean?

I believe that God is energy.We know the universe had a start, the Big Bang Theory is the conventional theory for the beginning of time. But energy was needed to form the big bang, and according to the law of conservation of energy, energy must have existed before the big bang.

Thus, I am inclined to argue, that God is energy, and energy is God. Because energy has always existed. The more you learn about science, the more you realise how little we know about our universe, all that dark matter out there, all the unexplained phenomena.

There is much that is imperceptible. Are you sure you want to open that door?

You cannot prove non-existence as it leaves no evidence, which is exactly the amount of evidence for any deity's existence.

There are certain views that inspire one to use the word God, but none of them include the type of behavior commonly attributed to the deity described in the Bible. I'm afraid that guy has caused some harm to the potential of many to those aforementioned certain views. They are no less blind than the atheist you describe.

Science doesn't disprove God. Science is natural, God is supernatural.

Now that we've gotten Mr. Hippy out of the way...

Some atheist thinkers have tried to disprove God with the Problem of Evil. Most famous is Epicurus' argument. But that was over 2000 years ago, during which many Theist philosophers have picked the argument apart.

As it is, atheism has not made any other real arguments against God's existence. Incidentally, atheist philosophers of religion are rather lacking in the academic world. So that might be a reason why.

right now, there is no way to prove god doesn't exists, just like no one can prove he does. Science will probably never be able to because science is mostly a bunch of theories, and theories are not proof. “You would be more likely to assemble a fully functioning and flying jumbo jet by passing a hurricane through a junk yard than you would be to assemble the DNA molecule by chance"

Yeah.

I know what you mean.

Did you ever try to prove you had a vivid dream to someone else?

That would be foolish. No one is a mind reader and there is no way one can capture dreams visually or even with audio.

Faith falls in this area of man's reality. So does unbelief.

To me this question to prove there is or is no God falls in this category.

Later.

Edit. The poster Krystal has a very excellent analogy or example and I applaud her for this! Thank you.

It is MORE foolish of theists to BELIEVE in something that has never been shown to have the slightest shred of evidence. Even though a blind person cannot see color, there is plenty of evidence within the accessible experience of any blind person that color does, indeed exist. All she or he needs do is ask any sighted person. If the entire sighted population of the entire world tells the blind person that color exists, I would say that that much testimony is fairly reliable. Not to mention the fact that a sighted person actually CAN see the color.

Has ANY person ever seen god? No. No evidence.'

And just so you know, we atheists do not have to prove that a god does not exist. YOU have the burden of proving, if you can, that a god does exist, since YOU are the party making the positive assertion of the existence of that which is as yet unproven. YOU have to either prove it or quit asking us to believe it exists.

It constantly amazes me how little you theists understand the legal principle of burden of proof. Aren't there any Christian lawyers out there who can explain it to the slow learners for whom this is too hard to understand?

Lady M

atheist and lawyer

Watch Ancient Aliens

You make an incredibly good point, sadly one not many are willing to hear. Only those truely open to discovering the truth seek truth allowing for all possibilities, most claim to desire the truth but only if the answer falls within their predetermined section of the spectrum.

(notice how those who answer "science" have not explained how you prove color exists to the blind, can they witness tests done for color spectrum?)