Evidence there is no god

[tsig]

Your argument rests on the assumption that the only possible god is the one described by fundamentalist Christians. The lack of belief in the anthropomorphic god described in the Bible is hardly worthy of the term "Atheism".

Mildred: Hey Johnny, what are you rebelling against?
Johnny: Whadda you got?

 

[devnull]

ftfy

Thank you. I missed the error.

 

[SezMe]

Then Tebow was abandoned by Jesus on Christmas day in front of millions.

This is one of your examples of lack of evidence for god. But for Jesus to "abandon" Tebow he would have to exist. Thus, this example, taken at face value, is evidence for (at least) Jesus.

 

[Leumas]

Why would we hate you for your beliefs?

As for your analogy, it sucks.

 

[Leumas]

This is one of your examples of lack of evidence for god. But for Jesus to "abandon" Tebow he would have to exist. Thus, this example, taken at face value, is evidence for (at least) Jesus.

Who the hell is Tebow????????? please someone tell me.

 

[RobDegraves]

Sigh...

Why would we hate you for your beliefs?

As for your analogy, it sucks.

I don't have beliefs, that was the point I was trying to make. I guess it wasn't clear enough.

As far as my analogy, saying that it sucks... sucks.

It's not exactly an insightful dissection of my comment.

It was a goat. A goat that can somehow kill multiple people.

Well... it was a very angry goat.

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/animals/snowball.asp

Know what? If there is something behind the door, there would be evidence, or very well could be, without ever opening the door.

Ok.. you know I'm not referring to an actual door right?

In the case of God (s) or their absence, the fact is that we can speculate all we want but lacking a specific definition makes it impossible to determine much.. if anything as to what would constitute evidence of existence or evidence of absence.

Let's say we are looking at a God (s) that is omniscient and omnipotent. Of course He/She/It could act and we could not prove a thing if such proof was, for some obscure reason, unwanted.

God (s) could just do a huge miracle and then make us all forget about it. Or have everything planned out in advance so nothing is needed. Etc.


Again, if you want to reference my so-called beliefs.... speculation is useless, though sometimes fun, unless you have some facts to back them up.


We just don't.

 

[slingblade]

Who the hell is Tebow????????? please someone tell me.

Google?

He's an American football (handegg) player. He prays a lot.

 

[Mr. Scott]

Who the hell is Tebow????????? please someone tell me.

Tim Tebow is a famous American Football player who is currently know for annoying atheists by praying excessively to Jesus before or after plays. He's been quite successful, but on Christmas day, his team was demolished by an opponent not know for atheist-annoying public praying.

This is one of your examples of lack of evidence for god. But for Jesus to "abandon" Tebow he would have to exist. Thus, this example, taken at face value, is evidence for (at least) Jesus.

An accident in the way I worded the comment is evidence for Jesus? I don't think so.

What kind of god would help you win, by granting your prayers, except on his birthday, when he bitch slaps you in front of millions to your profound humiliation? A sadistic one, or a nonexistent one. Which seems more likely?

 

[Leumas]

Tim Tebow is a famous American Football player who is currently know for annoying atheists by praying excessively to Jesus before or after plays. He's been quite successful, but on Christmas day, his team was demolished by an opponent not know for atheist-annoying public praying.



An accident in the way I worded the comment is evidence for Jesus? I don't think so.

What kind of god would help you win, by granting your prayers, except on his birthday, when he bitch slaps you in front of millions to your profound humiliation? A sadistic one, or a nonexistent one. Which seems more likely?

What kind of god would grant a millionaire football player a win over the other praying equally Christian team while in that exact moment thousands of children's prayers for food, cure from cancer and succor (play on words intentional ) from rape and violation went totally unheeded?

Only an egregiously heinously vile and sadistic dastardly scoundrel would do that.

 

[slingblade]

Sigh...
I don't have beliefs, that was the point I was trying to make. I guess it wasn't clear enough.

Gee whiz, ya think?

Ok.. you know I'm not referring to an actual door right?

As my mother would say, "that's a nice, deep hole you've clevered yourself into. How're you getting out?"

In the case of God (s) or their absence, the fact is that we can speculate all we want but lacking a specific definition makes it impossible to determine much.. if anything as to what would constitute evidence of existence or evidence of absence.

Let's say we are looking at a God (s) that is omniscient and omnipotent. Of course He/She/It could act and we could not prove a thing if such proof was, for some obscure reason, unwanted.

God (s) could just do a huge miracle and then make us all forget about it. Or have everything planned out in advance so nothing is needed. Etc.

Right. Apologetics. They're useless, and make this god seem no smarter than a petulant little boy. That's how I know these apologetics are the contrivances of mere mortals: if this is the best this god can come up with, it's no brighter than we are, so how is it a god again?

If this god is so awesome, and so far outside the bounds of reality, that to manifest itself would either be impossible within the laws of physics so that it can't show itself without destroying everything utterly, or if it's so mind-bending that we'd all be rendered helpless before it, unable to keep from worshiping it just by knowing it exists....then what does it even need with us?

Humanity has always had god beliefs of some kind, all over the globe and throughout our history. This means that there is either some basis in fact for them, or that we made them up. I don't think that's a false dichotomy, I don't think I'm excluding some middle. Either god is real, or its not. Either we have, at some point, communicated with this god, or we haven't.

God is either fact, or it's fiction.
If god is fact, then there is either one of them, or more than one of them.
If there is only one god, it's inept.
If there are multiple gods, they are all worse than inept.

If there is some basis in fact for god beliefs, this indicates very strongly that god has contacted humanity, has manifested itself in some way to humanity, not just once, but several times and in several places--but only back during a time when we were too ignorant to properly conceive it or appreciate it as little more than confused superstition. Otherwise, how did we come to know of it?

If it never contacted us or engaged with us, then we clearly made it and all its attributes up. Even if it is real, if it has never contacted us, we cannot know any of its attributes, so we must have invented them.

But if it did contact us, we have so many differing and even contradictory god beliefs, that we know, quite obviously, that some of us must have gotten it very wrong. How'd that happen? How does a god manifest itself or contact all of humanity in such a way that none of humanity has a uniform idea of what it is? Oh, maybe it only contacted one small segment of humanity, and the idea spread from there, getting distorted as spreading ideas tend to do.

But why contact only some of us? Why bother at all if we're going to end up getting it so wrong, that we can none of us agree on any of it?

So where is it now, when we are overall much smarter, know much more than we did back when our myths tell us this god or gods first made itself known to us, and could now mentally accept the reality of it much better than we could when we were still trying to figure out what those lights in the sky were, or how to make wild grains grow under our control?

Why did it do that at all?
If it wanted to stay hidden, why didn't it stay hidden?
If it wanted us to know it's real, why don't we all know?

Why is god such a bumbling prat?

Again, if you want to reference my so-called beliefs.... speculation is useless, though sometimes fun, unless you have some facts to back them up.


We just don't.

That pretty much sums up the futility of god-belief. Speculation about god is useless, and no, it's not even fun, without any facts to back up the speculation.

The facts are glaringly absent.

You couldn't just say this? It's not a profound idea. Many people have already, clearly, and plainly said the same thing.

 

[joesixpack]

It was a goat. A goat that can somehow kill multiple people.

An Armenian friend of mine told me a very funny joke once. It seems a man was traveling through the countryside when he came to a small village. Looking around he could see no one about until he came to the church in the center of town. There was a long line of somber people waiting outside the door. The traveler approached the man standing near the head of the line,

"What's going on here?" he asked

"There's been a death" came the answer.

"Oh my goodness, I'm sorry. Who was it?"

"It was my mother-in-law" said the villager.

"Oh! I'm so sorry for your loss" said the traveler, "May I ask how it happened?"

"It seems she was weeding the garden when our billy goat butted her so hard that she was killed"

"What a terrible thing to happen!" said the traveler. The villager simply nodded soberly.

After an uncomfortable pause the traveler asked "May I borrow that goat?"

The man answered "What do you think this line is for?"

 

[RobDegraves]

@ slingblade et al.

Well... I'm going to ignore the ad hominems since you seem to be emotionally attached to the subject. I usually don't like these sorts of conversations because everyone seems to want to insult everyone else. I'm more interested in the logic of the op.

Right. Apologetics. They're useless, and make this god seem no smarter than a petulant little boy. That's how I know these apologetics are the contrivances of mere mortals: if this is the best this god can come up with, it's no brighter than we are, so how is it a god again?

Irrelevant statement.

My statement was simply a couple of examples from a list of possible definitions for God (s) that obviate the need to answer prayers in a way that is obviously miraculous.

The subject of answering prayers is an ancillary one at any rate. How do we know what criteria a deity would have for answering prayers, if it does at all. Maybe it does so randomly, or for some secret purpose either benign or not so benign. Maybe it throws a dart at a board.

If this god is so awesome, and so far outside the bounds of reality, that to manifest itself would either be impossible within the laws of physics so that it can't show itself without destroying everything utterly, or if it's so mind-bending that we'd all be rendered helpless before it, unable to keep from worshiping it just by knowing it exists....then what does it even need with us?

That statement has nothing to do with the subject.

It's about whether or not you can prove that there is no such thing as God(s). Your analysis of it's intent or psychology is irrelevant.

This means that there is either some basis in fact for them, or that we made them up.

There is a third possibility. We made them up but something exists that we don't know about that may or may not fit our imaginary concepts.

You couldn't just say this? It's not a profound idea. Many people have already, clearly, and plainly said the same thing.

I did say it clearly and I didn't claim it was original.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Well, I am sure everyone will hate me but I am going to disagree.

I think I would like to illustrate my opinion on God (s) with a bit of an example if no one minds.

Let's say you have a group of people in a room and they are sitting around a table. There is just one door but no one knows what is beyond it because it's locked.

Everyone speculates endlessly about what is on the other side. Eventually some people come up with some interesting theories but there is still no way to find out without opening the door. Is it another room, outside, a big hole?

One person starts to tell everyone else that there is a monster on the other side of the door. If you open the door, it will eat you. Others scoff and say that the door monster doesn't exist.

Eventually the scoffers try to open the door and a large goat kills them.

So... do you really think there is a point in saying yes there is a monster or no there is no monster? I don't think either side is valid and speculation is useless without evidence. Live your life without worrying about what is behind the door until you find a way to open it. Then watch out for goats.

I have no interest in any hypothetical doors or goats. My only interest in goats at all is other people constantly telling me that I should care about the goat, that the goat should be the basis for laws and society, and that I am naive or even evil for not believing in the goat.

The goat, being non-existent, doesn't worry me at all. The people who believe in it, however, sometimes worry me a great deal.

 

[tsig]

Well, I am sure everyone will hate me but I am going to disagree.

I think I would like to illustrate my opinion on God (s) with a bit of an example if no one minds.

Let's say you have a group of people in a room and they are sitting around a table. There is just one door but no one knows what is beyond it because it's locked.

Everyone speculates endlessly about what is on the other side. Eventually some people come up with some interesting theories but there is still no way to find out without opening the door. Is it another room, outside, a big hole?

One person starts to tell everyone else that there is a monster on the other side of the door. If you open the door, it will eat you. Others scoff and say that the door monster doesn't exist.

Eventually the scoffers try to open the door and a large goat kills them.

So... do you really think there is a point in saying yes there is a monster or no there is no monster? I don't think either side is valid and speculation is useless without evidence. Live your life without worrying about what is behind the door until you find a way to open it. Then watch out for goats.

God's a killer goat?

I for one welcome our Capering God!

 

[RobDegraves]

God's a killer goat?

Ooh. Don't get me wrong. I was just using the goat as an example.

I myself am a staunch Pastafarian.

Seriously.

I may not tithe but I do own a pirate outfit.

 

[tsig]

@ slingblade et al.

Well... I'm going to ignore the ad hominems since you seem to be emotionally attached to the subject. I usually don't like these sorts of conversations because everyone seems to want to insult everyone else. I'm more interested in the logic of the op.



Irrelevant statement.

My statement was simply a couple of examples from a list of possible definitions for God (s) that obviate the need to answer prayers in a way that is obviously miraculous.

The subject of answering prayers is an ancillary one at any rate. How do we know what criteria a deity would have for answering prayers, if it does at all. Maybe it does so randomly, or for some secret purpose either benign or not so benign. Maybe it throws a dart at a board.


That statement has nothing to do with the subject.

It's about whether or not you can prove that there is no such thing as God(s). Your analysis of it's intent or psychology is irrelevant.



There is a third possibility. We made them up but something exists that we don't know about that may or may not fit our imaginary concepts.



I did say it clearly and I didn't claim it was original.

We know, your God Works In Mysterious Ways.

ETA: read your statement above and I'm sorry if I misread you but your posts read like the classic god-botherers usual opening gambit.

 

[RobDegraves]

We know, your God Works In Mysterious Ways.

Sigh.. my God works in noodly ways.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

@ slingblade et al.

Well... I'm going to ignore the ad hominems since you seem to be emotionally attached to the subject. I usually don't like these sorts of conversations because everyone seems to want to insult everyone else. I'm more interested in the logic of the op.

I didn't see where sling insulted you, could you point it out?

It's about whether or not you can prove that there is no such thing as God(s). Your analysis of it's intent or psychology is irrelevant.

If people are going to propose omniscient and omnipotent gods that exhibit no more sophistication or intelligence than humans, it's hardly irrelevant to point out how illogical that is. If God is no more mature or intelligent than us, exactly how is He a God?

There is a third possibility. We made them up but something exists that we don't know about that may or may not fit our imaginary concepts.

Again, you can postulate imaginary maybes all day long, but if we can never know God, or be shown any reason to worship God, why should we believe that the concept has any relevance whatsoever? There are important things that can be shown to exist that do need our attention more than an imaginary friend.

 

[RobDegraves]

Well.. statements in big letters obviously must be addressed.

I didn't see where sling insulted you, could you point it out?

Not insults, ad hominems. For example...

As my mother would say, "that's a nice, deep hole you've clevered yourself into. How're you getting out?"

That is obviously not an actual argument.

If people are going to propose omniscient and omnipotent gods that exhibit no more sophistication or intelligence than humans, it's hardly irrelevant to point out how illogical that is. If God is no more mature or intelligent than us, exactly how is He a God?

It largely depends on your definition of God and what you base your estimate of sophistication and intelligence on. Something could be intelligent and sophisticated without necessarily thinking like a human would, just to name one example.

Again, you can postulate imaginary maybes all day long, but if we can never know God, or be shown any reason to worship God, why should we believe that the concept has any relevance whatsoever? There are important things that can be shown to exist that do need our attention more than an imaginary friend.

I know that this seems difficult for everyone to comprehend so I will attempt to be very clear.



1. I am not in any way saying that anyone should worship, pay attention to or even give a rat's ass about any deity without actual evidence of that deity existing.

2. I am simply pointing out the logical mistake in the OP. Claiming that you can logically prove that God does not exist depends on a host of definitions that are not established in the op, or elsewhere in this thread and do not take into account a number of possibilities. Ergo, it is not logically proven.

If you folks want to think that I have some religious view point that I don't.. that is hardly my fault. I hope I have been clear enough.

 

[tsig]

Well.. statements in big letters obviously must be addressed.



Not insults, ad hominems. For example...



That is obviously not an actual argument.




It largely depends on your definition of God and what you base your estimate of sophistication and intelligence on. Something could be intelligent and sophisticated without necessarily thinking like a human would, just to name one example.







I know that this seems difficult for everyone to comprehend so I will attempt to be very clear.



1. I am not in any way saying that anyone should worship, pay attention to or even give a rat's ass about any deity without actual evidence of that deity existing.

2. I am simply pointing out the logical mistake in the OP. Claiming that you can logically prove that God does not exist depends on a host of definitions that are not established in the op, or elsewhere in this thread and do not take into account a number of possibilities. Ergo, it is not logically proven.

If you folks want to think that I have some religious view point that I don't.. that is hardly my fault. I hope I have been clear enough.

Looks to me like you're really determined to leave a back door open to god.