Can atheists actually prove that there is no God?

Question

I mean proof, with real hard logic. Not a drop of uncertainty. 2+2=4 logic.

We wouldn't want to make illogical leaps of faith like religious people, would we?

Answer 1

Actually they can't prove anything.



1. They can't prove evolution in the light of cell theory



2. They can't prove there is no God.



3. They can't prove there is a God.



So in a nutshell, they can't prove anything.

Answer 2

There will always be things that don't exist to everyone, just as there will always be things that do.

The difference being in your own experience of them, or lack thereof.

Answer 3

We know that there has never been a god seen by anyone If there was a god, that entity would be known all over earth by everyone. But there has never been anything or entity that has claimed to have made the universe either.

Answer 4

If anyone can prove unicorns are not real, I am happy to use their methodology to prove gods are not real.



Everything we know to be real is supported by evidence. Nothing we know to be real was caused by magic. There is no objective evidence of gods and no reason for there to be gods beyond the craving of early uneducated people to find answers to things they didn't understand.



We have a well established religion industry whose wealth and power relies on maintaining the delusion while we have millions of people brainwashed from birth into religious belief and constantly reinforcing that brainwashing through the rituals and 'collective worship'. These are a way of 'norming' beliefs through ritual and peer pressure to prevent independent thinking. Their fear of abandoning their comfort blanket of religious belief and its associated social identity is more than most people can bear. They will defend their make-believe god and the associated dogma because they are too weak to accept the reality.



With that in mind, I can understand why they would claim one or more gods are real. They are emotionally anchored to the idea. They are addicted to it. No dishonesty is too great if it feeds their addiction. This is how it is for all addicts.



We do not need gods to live good and moral lives. Religious dogma is not morality. Morality is rational. Gods are neither needed nor apparent.

Answer 5

No, Atheists cannot do such a thing & they never will be able to do such a thing. The existence, & supposed nonexistence, of God is something that cannot be perceived with the five physical senses, thus, if one believes in God this is, He must be accepted by faith.



One can argue for the existence of God & one can argue for the supposed nonexistence of God by using metaphysics, as metaphysics, not science, is the field in which studies the existence, & supposed nonexistence, of God, but metaphysics wouldn't get an Atheist anywhere as metaphysics pretty much rules in favour of Theism, thus proving that God exists.

Answer 6

This guy on youtube below has been challenging atheists for years. He has defeated Richard Dawkins, Hitchens when he was alive, The atheist experience show, the #1 most subbed atheist on youtube. He used to be an atheist but now admits atheists are full of crap and he is hilarious in his videos. Check him out at

Answer 7

Can you prove that a giant invisible dragon doesn't exist? It's the same thing.

Answer 8

There is no evidence for gods, or giant yellow teapots orbiting Jupiter

Answer 9

God's existence cannot be disproved by anyone who refuses to "think outside the box." And for those that can, God becomes incredibly REAL.

Answer 10

It's impossible to prove a negative. They can no more prove that God does not exist than believers can prove that he does. The whole thing has to be taken on faith.

Answer 11

We don't have to any more than religious nuts can PROVE that there is

Answer 12

Of course they can't, all they do is insult and can us religious people retarded because they can't find meaning in life.

Answer 13

No.They don't need proof.

Answer 14

That really depends on your definition of "God". If it is a specific god you are describing with characteristics that are clearly defined then it may be possible to disprove that particular god. That is, if those characteristics are contradictory or if they should manifest in measurable ways.



That is not the god that most people tend to believe in however. Most people believe in a god that does not manifest in any testable way. In that case no I cannot disprove that such a god exists.



Incidentally, I know of no atheist who says he is "100% sure of no God". There might be some of course I simply don't ever recall meeting one.



By an "atheist" I mean I have no positive belief in a god. It is not an expression of certainty in the nonexistence of a god.

Answer 15

They only believe in the God called no one and nothing.This God is all powerful ,wise and created all things./

Answer 16

Atheism is a philosophical position regarding belief, in this case, the lack of belief in a god. It is not nor is it intended to be a belief system, a set of ethical values or a truth claim. I don't have to defend my lack of belief in god any more than I have to defend the statement, "I don't like cheeseburgers."* 



Atheism is for grownups. It doesn't need to be explained by straw man arguments such as yours.



*Just for the record, I like cheeseburgers.

Answer 17

If an atheist claims there is no God then that atheist has to actually prove there is no God. It being a negative claim does not dissolve the atheist of the obligation to substantiate the claim. All claims, whether negative or positive, need substantiated to be considered valid and/or true. Latin Maxim: onus probandi.



As of yet no atheist has ever done that. Every attempt made has been nothing more than a mocking of religions, shifting the burden of proof, hasty generalization, deflection, etc. The list goes on and on.



It would therefore be reasonable to conclude, in terms of atheists and their inability to prove no God exist, that there is something within atheism or among atheists that inhibits their ability to think and reason logically.



Note:



I used the word "God" in the singular form and the questioner's question is referring to God in the generic sense of only one-God. Therefore, saying "which god?", which many atheists like to do, is not valid.



I should not have to give an explanation on this in a side note though. This is basic grade school English and community college level Theology.



Besides, you are suppose to be answering the question asked not asking questions in response. This is Q & A NOT Q & Q. Hence the word "ANSWERS" in Yahoo Answers.

Answer 18

I can't prove unicorns, giants, trolls, leprechauns, fairies and goblins exist either, does that mean by your logic that they also exist?

Answer 19

Atheists cannot prove that apart from their own self there is no one inside them. They too hear what a man hears and see what that man sees inside their heads. They must hide these facts to tell themselves that they are atheists.

Answer 20

I haven't heard a good proof yet, and suspect that proof or disproof of God is probably impossible. Most of the atheists I hear proclaiming proof of no God are actually angry at their parents church, decide emotionally that they don't want a God, so it must not exist.



Note that I do not actually care, so long as new atheists avoid becoming as arrogant and self-righteous as other new converts to anything. Start acting like a new Fundie and I'll laugh at you and point out your follies.

Answer 21

whags the road for that? we cant even leave our planet and how are we suppose to assert that god doesnt exist? because you know, atheist are wthose who dont believe god or gods, thats the definition, and who claims that there are gods? religions



so, following the logic, atheists dont believe the religion claims of god. ok champ?

Answer 22

I think not ever, j don't get how you would prove there's no god, unless you could prove there's nothing after we die, so idk mabye

Answer 23

No, of course they cannot do that.

Answer 24

Show me yours and ill show you mine....



















....Oops, you cannot.



The simple truth of it is I have faith there is no god, further proof is not needed, only faith.



Your own argument mirrors mine.



But lets just say that if an asteroid the size of France, were on a collision course with the Earth, I cannot see a giant palm reaching out to block or deflect it.



American forms of christianity, along with their entire capitalist system and worship of war and destruction and the permitted carrying and use of a gun is DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED to the teachings of peace and love that the bible represents.



Bottom line is the ten commandments states above al othe teachings and points made in the biblical teachings that THOU SHALL NOT KILL.

There it is, black and white for all humanity to see.



Turn the other cheek. Again at complete odds to the handjobs in the US claiming to represent Christianity.



The American religions, for the vast majority are geared towards the financial gain, rather than following the inscribed word.



Ergo, there can be no god, or the god would have smitten that country and its backward teachings right off the face of the Earth.



Jesus created the first Pope. So Only the Catholic church, which has a Pope, can transcribe and interperate the the teachings in the bible.





Currently Americ faces a system similar to the Nazis, which lends towards the argument that they are Evil, as inscribed in the Bible.





Its quite simple an idea to comprehend to anyone who doesnt sit on a porch playing a banjo.

Answer 25

You have to prove there is a god.

Answer 26

The Egyptians thought the sun was God.

Some Indians think that cows or monkeys are holy.

The Greeks thought Zeus was the guy.

Hopefully you now see that they were all wrong



Read up about the many religions today and how strongly each one thinks that the others are unbelievers.

Can you religious types please stop hating eachother for giving a non-existant God different names ?



There is absolutely no proof that she/he exists.

The ones who still go to churches are the old or the very young who they take along, or people in poor countries where poor education might mean that critical analysis is replaced by solid oppresive dogma.



The proper question should be can anyone really prove, (not just infer), that there is one.



Occam's razor, the scientific approach, tells us not to assume any theory is correct unless definite evidence provided. Belief is the opposite of that; it invites you to accept untested superstitious nonsense unquestioningly.



All wonders of nature are fully explained by evolution or emergent complexity, but those indoctrinated in religious dogma from a young age resist hearing that.



Start asking yourself grown-up questions about what this, (invisible), imagined being would look like or is made of. Is it one of the known particles of quantum theory. ? It all starts to look silly.

If he/she has no substance how could he perform the miracles that some people believe in.

Astronomers can now see to the furthermost depth of the universe. They have news for you.

There is no sign of the big guy there.



But test this for yourself. Just pray to the almighty being that you imagine exists.

Any child will tell you that even important prayers are not answered sometimes, and that

illness can strike down loved ones. What about the many prayers for peace in 1939 ?



So is HE just being mean or is it that there are no great powers, because there is nothing there.



Do not give us that old gumpf about mysterious ways - that is just a cop out.



No, it is time to grow up. You faced the truth about father christmas and the tooth fairy.

Sorry to tell you - there is no God.

No hell or heaven, that is just a story for children.



You believe because you were indoctrinated at a young age.

That is a powerful and immoral form of brain washing,

but sad to say you may never be able to see your way out of it.



Do the best to be happy with yourself despite these weird beliefs

but please try to avoid spreading the ignorance.

Answer 27

No

Answer 28

What do YOU mean by "atheist".



I found that for those religious zealots who keep using that word, "atheist" means a person who fails to swallow the same lies as the zealots are trying to impose onto others. Or that an atheist is a person who fails to practice the fake rites that go with the fake religion of the zealot.



An atheist is a person who simply fails to believe there is such a thing as a god (any god, not just the one invented by proto-Hebrews around 5000 years ago) that controls our lives. They do not need to prove anything, since (most of them) are not trying to impose their beliefs on anyone. They only want you to stop pushing your fake beliefs in such a way that it affects their lives.

Answer 29

Christian know Jesus/Lord from the Bible and there is evidence proof the Bible is just made up. There is no evidence proof God show himself and I guess maybe the creator existed and we are just like the animal farm.

Answer 30

No. 'God', without any other definition, is not a falsifiable idea.



"To all atheists who say you can't prove a negative, then aren't you making a leap in faith by saying you're 100% sure of no God?"

No, because I am not saying that. I just do not believe in any god.

Answer 31

As well intended as the question is I think it comes from a very confused and troubled person. God is a non tangible being. By asking people to disprove it's existence, you clearly question your own belief in god. Since god does not exist there is nothing to disprove.



For example if I said to you pick up that piece of paper from the floor, when there was not any paper you would quite rightly say how can I pick up something that is not there. Similarly how can I disprove god when god is not there to disprove?

Answer 32

Math and History.



Do the math that 50,000+ gods throughout (recorded) human History that have been proven false

and 20,000+ different sects of Christianity of which only 1 can be right (according to their own doctrines)...



There is a 99.99857% probability that your god is false -- and as one can probably only name 50 or so gods, one should round to the nearest significant figure -- 2 places behind the decimal.



100%

Answer 33

Not a chance.

Answer 34

It's pretty much impossible to disprove god's existence, but personally that only solidifies the idea that it's a man-made construct, because an idea that invincible can only be conceived by man's brain. Nowhere else in life are we certain of anything. The idea that "faith will guide us", faith in the unknowable, is far too convenient for me. But as a skeptic, I accept that I am unsure or undecided in most things, and have learned to respect other peoples positions in either atheist or religious viewpoints, as it is the only way to avoid conflict.

Answer 35

No. I also can't prove that flying unicorns don't exist. So sorry to disappoint.

Answer 36

God is not registered to vote. God has no cell phone. God has no driving licence. God has never stood up in a church and said "here I am guys".

Answer 37

I don't care. He is your god, you prove he exists.



The question is like me saying "gungun is real and sh1ts out cupcakes, now you prove gungun is real." Erm, no.

Answer 38

No but neither can anyone prove (their) God exists. Why can't anyone just respect someone else's beliefs regardless of their own beliefs. There would be a lot less trouble in the world that way.

Answer 39

You're sorta missing the point: Atheists don't have to prove anything - they're not the ones making the ridiculous claims. All they are doing is refusing to accept these claims without evidence to back them up.

Answer 40

Nobody can prove there is one.

Answer 41

Gods are man-made ideas that were invented extremely late in human history - first appearing in the Neolithic around 11,000 years ago and gradually spread from a tiny corner of the world that lay somewhere between the ancient cities of Ur and Nineveh.



Prior to the invention of gods, people long believed in various flavors of shamanism where a priest or "medicine man" would awaken sleeping spirits and call upon them to do good or evil deeds. Shamanism itself was preceded by an even older belief system called animism where every object including rocks and rivers were thought to contain a spiritual force.



The transformation from earth-bound spirits to sky gods followed the invention of agriculture. Agriculture required the precise charting of the sun and the stars in order to track the seasons. Large stone monuments appeared and curious points of light were discovered that crossed the constellations. These lights which are now known as planets became embodied in mystery and eventually into the realm of the divine.



Celestial gods were gradually replaced with supernatural personified beings after the Egytians and Greeks began immortalizing their kings, pharoahs and famous hero warriors. The idea of humans born as gods ultimately sparked the belief that ordinary men living on the fringes of society could also be gods as well - one individual in particular that continues to be celebrated to this day.



The progression of our religious beliefs demonstrate that gods are only provisional ideas - human ingenuities that have come and gone throughout our history - manufactured from previous concepts that faded from popularity as newer and bolder ideas emerged.

Answer 42

Do atheists really need to.

Update to update 2.

There are an infinite number of things that don't exist, except in our imagination. Try to prove, or disprove any of them.

There are a finite number of things that do exist. At the slightest hint of credible evidence that god does exist, we will set out to prove, or disprove it.

"til then.

Answer 43

Hahaha

Answer 44

Well, good luck cu that's never going to happen because it's not possible.



I’m a Baha'i, a member of the Baha'i Faith. We believe there is only one God, that sent Buddha, Jesus, Moses, etc to humanity, now Baha’u’llah has come.

hearttoheart.net

Bahai.org

Answer 45

You can't prove a negative.

Answer 46

I mean proof, with real hard logic.



- Most of us have gone beyond sixth grade, and when you do, you will learn that you cannot prove a negative.

Answer 47

Can theists actually prove that there IS a God?

Answer 48

No one, of any persuasion, can either prove or disprove the existence of a god.



Period., Full Stop. The argument over the existence of god is a totally useless waste of time.

Answer 49

Can Christians actually prove that there is no Zeus ?



-I contend we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.- Stephen Roberts

Answer 50

NO CUZ GOD WILL BE REAL FOREVER!!

Answer 51

Unlike agnostics, atheists are making the claim that God doesn't exist and therefore are subject to questions like this.

Answer 52

I take it you're a Big Question proponent.

The idea being, whether or not you take a position on the existence of god, you think it's a Big Question.

I'm not convinced of that. To me it's a rather trite, vague and uninteresting question.

Answer 53

.

Answer 54

I would suggest researching some near-death experiences that may prove that God does exist.

Answer 55

No

Answer 56

No. At the end its all chance whether god exists or not. Think of religion like a death insurance. If you die and theres no god then its over, but if there is a god and you didnt believe then your in trouble. I personally do believe for also some other reasons

Answer 57

So basicly what you are saying is that atheists are taking an illogical leap of faith by not taking an illogical leap of faith?

Answer 58

Atheists are unconcerned with proving there are no 'god(s)' - most importantly because you can't prove the non-existence of something, but also because no matter how hard they try to shift it, the burden of proof always remains squarely on the shoulders of the ones making the fantastic claims to provide the requisite evidence to support them.



I've heard many theists attempt to provide 'evidence' to support the existence of their 'god(s)', but none of it has been the least bit compelling. It also doesn't help that inferring the existence of an infinitely more complex 'creator' (who didn't require creation itself) in order to explain the existence and complexity of the universe is redundant (at best).

Answer 59

Can you prove there is? Like actual evidence

Answer 60

Quite easily. In order to refute the existence of a god all I need to do is falsify a claim made for that god.



It is claimed the Greek gods live at the top of Mount Olympus. In order to falsify that claim I can climb to the top of the mountain and look for them.



It is claimed that the christian god made men from mud and magic breath. Science has categorically proved this claim to be false. If such a basic claim for the existence of the god has been shown to be untrue then it has been proved that the god is not real.

Answer 61

Can Atheist actually "PROVE" that their is no "God" ?



the question chose the higher case "G" version of an IDEA ..



what are IDEAS , human thoughts and what is the source of all Human IDEAS ,



Humans How do we KNOW humans have IDEAS , they express them in language



. who created the words that one is using to express this thought to constructed the sentence to ask this question ... so one was TAUGHT language ..



are people TAUGHT about the IDEA people label god , I often ask this question when you TEACH a child language its done by "ASSOCIATION" a caretaker holds up a Ball and repeats to the child BALL BALL ...FORK FORK ..EGG EGG ...



what is that child degree of certainty about the Egg .. is it an IDEA So since one chose the higher case "G" .. what does the care giver hold up to form the ASSOCIATION for the child for the "God" ....the BIBLE ?



How much CERTAINTY does that child have that book is the God .. so when a theist child has its first trip to a LIBRARY does it THINK to itself WOW this Building has a really lot of gods in it .



.. what is the word PROOF used to express "SUFFICIENT" to establish a claim as TRUE ( to be the case ) it does not contain the word CERTAINTY there are DEGREES of certainty different GOALS require different degrees of certainty did one note the word "TO" motion toward or INTENT or conformity or association



so i have a balancing scale in one bowl i have 1 % doubt and in the other bowl i have 99% of evidence for a CLAIM ( this is the key word coming up ) ASSERTED BY ANOTHER PERSON one can question everything ..



. Do i question the SUN . I have a REASONABLE EXPECTATION tomorrow it will rise in the east .. WHY ( reasons ) because i "KNOW" it has at least 23,725 times before in my life time ..do i have CERTAINTY yes a high degrees



. is their a possibility it will not Yes .. But i am going to LIVE MY LIFE based on the past pattern that it has ... and if i Die in my sleep tonight it won't mater will it it will rise for someone else to witness it...



. I tend to evaluate any event claim or circumstance related to humans related to INTENT MOTIVE & AGENDA ... some might possibly want to explore that related to GOD IDEAS also consider this



what came first THEIST Claiming a god ( which they have not PROVEN ) or my Response I have no reason to accept that IDEA / Claim because you have not supplied sufficient evidence for me accept it ...



.. Atheist only REJECT ONE MORE claim of god than any individual who is a THEIST ,



so rejecting various god claims is actually the NORM for humans

Answer 62

It is always very difficult to prove a negative. But on the other hand, can members of any of the world's many religions actually "prove" the existence of their gods or god?

Answer 63

I feel I have logically proven that there is no god. Not just the Christian god but any



©If a god did exist it could not just always have been god. The term god implies certain attributes. These attributes are meaningless without something for them to apply to. example - Superman has attributes but if there are no other men he is no longer superman. If there is nothing for him to bend with his bare hands how does the strength attribute apply? If there is nothing for him to see through x ray vision is meaningless. A God before the creation had nothing to be god to. A king without a kingdom is not a king. A god without the creation is the god of nothing.

So for any god to exist before the creation is senseless. It would know all of nothing (omniscience), it has power over nothing (omnipotence), has nothing to be good to (benevolence) and nothing to love so how could it love? The 'god' is meaningless.

The only way a god could exist is with the creation but, theist extrapolate god and put it outside the creation. It's like trying to remove the forest from the trees. God could only exist with the creation if it existed at all.

I do not claim god exist. I do try to conceive if a god existed how could it? The problem with religion is it keeps people with in the box or book (scriptures). They then can't think outside of it.

If a god did exist wouldn't it make more sense to reveal itself always and from the beginning? The gestalt universe could be regarded as one body. We are like protons or neutrons within an atom something in something else in a expanding universe. If existence was the manifestation of god then god is everything that is. In that way it could be everywhere, is in everything and is infinite and it is one. I think of space, matter/energy and time as a universal recycling bin and perpetual motion machine. It's constantly morphing itself. Perhaps so that all parts may come to know that it is. Think of a new born that is learning it's body. The eyes follow the hands and it learns this is part of me. It learns to control it. It comes to self awareness. Because everything is of the universe and everything will surrender all the atoms it gained from it back to it, the cycle of matter to energy back to matter is completed. So time moves on. The arrangement of atoms is infinite. When we gaze into the vastness of space we can not help but, to be awed. If you have ever been to Niagara Falls you would know the feeling of the falls pulling you in. Is it gravity, is it hypnotic or is it your mind has found union. Much like the babe discovering a body part belongs to it. Do you belong to the tide your mind follows looking out to sea or to the stars in the night sky? Does the treed mountain or barren canyon grip you and pull you to it? Is this how a real god would speak? In silence to all life forms from the beginning of time. Not by proxy in one mans tongue left for others to translate. As the creation god would not be in hiding it would be exposed all the time. Like plants it speaks in silence. Like music it speaks in notes. Not in one tongue but universally. It would not matter that you honored it. Like the apple tree it gives unconditionally. If you stone the tree or worship it, it bares its fruit to all who would have it. Any god would be dependent on the creation as much as the creation on the god. Without the creation it would be but a singularity.

To assume a god is to assume the need for it. In the theist religions they make god having needs. If god wants you to follow gods will that displays desire. Why would the god that can do anything have desire? You have to ask yourself this in the pursuit of saying everything had to come from somewhere. How could god exist without energy or matter and if god is energy/matter and it (energy/matter) always was then why the need for god? end of ©.

I have had many theist thumbs down me on this and had only one try to counter it with a senseless answer (my opinion) but, at least he tried.

Answer 64

Let us contemplate this, from A to Z.



A- If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as AHRUN, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



B- If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as BACCHUS, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



C-If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as Crom Cruc, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



D-If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as Darzhu-mate, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



E-If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as Eshara, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



F-If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as Fu-hsing, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



G-If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as Goah-Phuquioras, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



H-If you and I simply LACK a belief in the God known as Hadad, can you prove to me that He does not exist?

Or is your lack of belief simply based on a lack of testable evidence of His existence?



>>>SNIP!<<<

Z- Zeus. Same question.

Answer 65

Yes

Answer 66

I've got some really bad news for people that do not believe in God the DNA strand of the human body translates to binary code.





And plainly visible in that binary code is the name yhwh.



Now the chances of the letters yhwh appearing clearly repeating through the human DNA strand is astronomical as far as a coincidence those letters just happen to match the name of God how would the Ancients know that the human DNA strand contained those letters to falsely call God by looking at the DNA strand it is more likely that the designer of the human DNA strand sign his name to it to laugh in the face of those that would later Discover it

Answer 67

I guess not.



But theists can't disprove all the deities (thousands exist, apparently, & they all have zero evidence) that they disbelieve in either.



So technically, everyone should be agnostic since "The uncertainty remains no matter how small.", correct?

Answer 68

No, we cannot prove that fairies don't exist either.



We could possibly show that the chance of one particular god existing is unlikely. There are many god systems proposed by humanity. They are generally mutually exclusive. All of them have an equal claim to being the one true system. Therefore the rest will be false. The chances of the god system you pick being real are low even if you accept that gods actually exist.



Of course all believers have picked the "right" one according to them.



Also, there are religions yet to be invented, religions which have been forgotten, religions which will never be conceived, These should be put into the equation as well.

Answer 69

If only we had a book detailing all of the things God was supposed to have done then we could just use science to prove all of those things never happened.

Oh wait, we've already done that.

Answer 70

It isn't hard to make that case at all.

It just isn't there. That is all there is to it, it isn't there. And there is nothing to indicate it is there, nothing to give anyone the idea it is there.

Until somebody can substantiate at least some of that claim, it is just a false claim. There is no proving it is true because it isn't, there is no god to prove.

Answer 71

I don't deny the existence of a god/gods, I just simply find a lack of belief for one or more gods to exist.

Answer 72

The onus on conclusively and irrefutably proving God's existence is up to the theists, not us atheists. So where's your proof?

Answer 73

I don't think anyone can prove either (god exists or doesn't). ALTHOUGH i think there is a lot more actual evidence supporting evolution than some sort of god that magically created the universe.

Answer 74

Hell no.



Heaven is real.

God's Not Dead!

Answer 75

You cannot prove a negative ever, unless the positive is paradoxical and therefore cannot happen. In which case you are not proving the negative, but instead disproving a positive.

Answer 76

no they can not.

They claim they already have by showing how thing work with a god, but many of their explanations are hollow and do not work.

Answer 77

I will prove that He exists. Just research a man named Sathya Sai Baba.

Answer 78

Can theists actually prove that there is a god?

Answer 79

There is actually no atheist and all love God.

Everything is just all imaginary and only the truth is the holy spirit?

Answer 80

I don't need to prove there are no gods, I just need to see some credible evidence for one. Any god will do. Otherwise I have no reason to believe.



Logically for every truth there are many more false things that can be believed in it's stead. I have one true birthday with the remaining 364 days not being my birthday. Without any evidence, if you were to try and guess my birthday, you would probably be wrong.



The same goes with gods. If you can not provide rational evidence for a god, then it probably does not exist. Logic, science or maths.



As for people saying you can't use science to test for a god, if one interacts with the universe, that interaction is testable. Water into wine, for example.



And as we know simple, natural forces can create complexity, then a most improbable intelligent being just existing for no reason is hardly a rational position to take.

Answer 81

It is not atheists that pray to an invisible boogy man in the sky ?

Answer 82

No

Answer 83

I operate on the tentative conclusion that gods aren't real.

I also operate on the tentative conclusion that a piano won't fall on my head as soon as I leave the house.



I identify as an agnostic atheist. As an individual, my intellect and access to information is limited, and there's a lot of stuff that I could learn about that may actually be wrong. So I employ a filter. It's called the "Prove-It Filter". If people can't prove or provide evidence for what they're claiming, I don't believe them.

Answer 84

Atheists believe in things which be proved through hard evidence. Therefore, no they cannot prove that God does not exist. Neither can prove that unicorns, goblin and fairies do not exist.

Answer 85

I don't want to.

First: what does it matter what I can prove?

second: why should I make you take my journey?

third: it's not important to answer---by which I mean: life's challenges are the same no matter what you know.

Answer 86

It's like trying to prove that goblins are real. There is no evidence to support gods or goblins so the answer is no, there is no evidence to test to suggest that there is a god or goblins, or dragons, or fairy godmothers etc.



But the burden of proof is not on the atheist, he is just denying your claim because you have no evidence and as you well know, you don't need evidence to deny a claim.

Answer 87

Hobbit skeletons?

God?

Answer 88

No. Just as theists can't prove the existence of a deity.

Answer 89

How can atheists do that when they still hold on in their belief that the first life on earth is happening by accident.

Then their first duty to protect their belief as such is to explain in scientific term how a thing happening by accident ,when there is nothing existed before having a thing.

Answer 90

It is not my job to prove that your imagination is wrong.



I am not absolutely certain of anything,

including that some hypothetical God,

that you are imagining,

cannot possibly be real.



I am atheist because I do not believe in

the reality of any particular

or vaguely generalized

hypothetical god.



--

Regards,



John Popelish

Answer 91

It is logically impossible to prove a negative.

All they can say is they have found no evidence.

Answer 92

We don't have to. We don't believe in your gods, so there is no imperative to prove anything. You, on the other hand, really need to pull your finger out on the whole proof department, since you seem to be losing believers at an alarming rate.



Luck

Answer 93

I believe that God can examine every heart.

Those that truly seek him, will find him.



This is a very controversial topic to be with all truth.

Keep in mind, a thief can never find a cop, why? Because he is not looking for one.



If you want God, go find him. God won't let you down if you seek him from you heart.



I would also like to argue that Jesus is real. Whether people like it or not, world renowned historians confirmed the existence of Jesus and the accuracy of the bible through its prophesies. The bible prophesied that "In approximately 700 BC, the prophet Micah named the tiny village of Bethlehem as the birthplace of Israel's Messiah (Micah 5:2). The fulfillment of this prophecy in the birth of Christ is one of the most widely known and widely celebrated facts in history. (Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 105.)" As mentioned on http://www.reasons.org/articles/articles/fulfilled-prophecy-evidence-for-the-reliability-of-the-bible



Trust me there is more.



Go hunt

Answer 94

Proof by logic is not always possible to a scientist. Since the Christian God is not of this world, we have no way to perform tests. (Remember, Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world.")



Without a basis for testing, science can only observe and seek trends. The trend we see, which clearly is not proof, is that God has not made any appearances in person under circumstances where that appearance could be definitively verified. The problem with the testimony presented in the Bible is that it is all hearsay evidence at best, and sometimes not even that good. Therefore, all we can do is evaluate what is available. And the answer to THAT question is "We have no evidence. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Nichts. Nothing."



In the absence of evidence, the Null Hypothesis says that if you cannot prove your positive claim of the existence of X, there is no reason to believe that X exists. And that is where most atheists sit. (I don't presume to speak for all atheists by any means.) Without evidence, and not knowing whether the people who had these visions are subject to hallucinations or other forms of hysteria, we have no reason to trust the claims made in a book of dubious heritage. And it has been edited literally hundreds of times, so nobody - NOBODY - is actually reading "straight-up" scripture. It is a translation of a transcription of a reconstruction of a reassembly (from multiple sources) of a collection of ancient writings from a primitive culture. And you want us to believe THAT?

Answer 95

No but they can believe it

Answer 96

The burden of proof in this case is not on the atheist; the burden of proof lies with the person making the positive claim. It is not up to an atheist to disprove that God exists, it is up to the claimant (i.e. believer in God) to prove that it does. Not accepting a claim does not mean that there is absolutely no uncertainty; it simply implies that the preponderance of evidence does not cause the skeptic to believe in or agree with the claim. Now, if the skeptic wants to put forth an alternative positive claim, he/she bears the burden of proof for that assertion. Scientists and atheists attempt to make arguments based on evidence that provides the best explanation, and in light of new evidence, they will change their thinking.

Answer 97

They don't have to. Any logician will tell you that you cannot be forced to prove a negative. Think about it: how would you prove that leprechauns do not exist?



The burden of proof is on people who claim a positive, that something DOES exist. If it does, it should be entirely possible to prove that it does. Alas for the theists, they have yet to come up with a shred of objective, empirical evidence for the existence of a god. All they have is faith.

Answer 98

No the question is can you prove the Intelligent deity wizard exists.

Answer 99

no

Answer 100

And no one can prove that there IS a God

Answer 101

Just as a Christian who can prove there is no Ra, or Vishnu. And I mean proof, without a shadow of a doubt, and not nonsense quotes from the Bible.

Answer 102

I've always been under the impression that God cannot be proven or disprove. I even read that in the definition of 'God' in the dictionary when I was a little kid. How people don't know that is baffling to me. I didn't know how ignorant people are to that fact until I visited the R&S section as an adult. It really is indicative of how poorly educated our society is, or just plain human arrogance, or maybe both.



Unless the definition of 'God' has changed in the last 30 years, there is no logical proof or disproof for the existence of God. Any "proof" or "disproof" for or against Divinity would have to work around a premise based on fallacy, which is not how 'logic' works. A god that is subject to being proven or disproven implies limitation and flaw, which does not apply to 'God'.



An 'Unlimited God' cannot be restricted to the bounds of 'that' and 'that', 'here' and 'there', 'now' and 'then'. Everyone accepts that there is a God, or not, on the 'faith' that one is correct, unless you're agnostic. "Proof" is limited to the material world of form, and based on arbitrary metrics that are not inherent to the universe at all, outside of the mind's imagination.

Answer 103

No they cannot as atheism involves a logical fallacy known as a universal negative. Simply stated, a person would have to be omniscient and omnipresent to be able to say "there is no God" from his own pool of knowledge. Only someone capable of being in all places at the same time — with a perfect knowledge of all that is in the universe — can make such a statement based on the facts. In other words, a person would have to be God to say there is no God. Hence, the assertion is logically indefensible. Our atheist friends loose.

Answer 104

Peter Gore Seer,

Yes Off course Atheists Can Prove Your Request, But Your A Idiot Who Will Not Except Proof In Any Form So I Say Be Happy With Your Illusion That You Created With Other Delusional Worshipers, Closed Minds Are A Danger.

Answer 105

You can prove a negative, that's how math and logic works. Is there milk in your fridge? No? You just proved a negative. They havent disproven God.

Answer 106

Clearly you don't know the rules of advanced math and logic.



God can not be disproven because it was never true to begin with.

Answer 107

Yes.



Atheists can prove there is no God to anyone who is open to the idea with very little effort.



All gods are just ideas. It takes concerted effort to turn that idea into a belief. It doesn't take any effort to release one's self from that effort once they desire to do so.

Answer 108

Yes. Beyond reasonable or conceivable doubt, just like everything else.

Answer 109

It is impossible to prove something does not exist. You can not prove a Negative. It is up to your kind to prove existence, which you can not do. Therefor god does not exist.

Answer 110

One cannot prove something doesn t exist because one cannot be everywhere simultaneously to check everywhere



There is no reason to believe in any god however, that is more than good enough for me



i do not claim there is 'definitely no god', I do not need to to be an atheist. I simply do not believe in god.

Answer 111

I can't see him is that proof enough

Answer 112

No. We're waiting on those that claim there is a god to do the proving. The burden of proof is yours.

Answer 113

Thy don't have to.

Answer 114

it is a lot harder to disprove god then to "prove" god, think of it as someone telling you to find something invisible. What should be religion's downfall saves it as it becomes a shield from everything thrown at it to try and bring it down.

Answer 115

Yes there is a God and that entity lay within all of us. God doesn't have a name because it has no reason to have a man made title. It is of the before and after that doesn't need man's introduction. When awake in the mornings and think it's your old lady or girlfriend that's literally bring you back to life. It's not neither them it's God. That car accident that you missed because you didn't ride that day that took everybody's life. You think it was a coincidence or do you think it's was God's work that made you miss that ride? Or when you was down to your last dollar and no money in sight to feed your family and strangely you have food to eat. Was this also a coincidence or was that a work of God? Scientology need to stay within the realm of science not religion it doesn't mix.

Answer 116

No

Answer 117

No they can't. It has always puzzled me why they spend so much time, energy, and effort trying to prove the non-existence of something they say they don't believe in. I don't believe in ghosts, UFOs, or the Easter bunny, but I don't waste my time day in and day our trying to prove their non-existence or trying to convince others of it.

Answer 118

Can believers prove their is? Let's keep a balance of approach here and not become emotional.

Answer 119

None of the literally thousands of religions practiced in the millions of years since the human race appeared have been able to produce one little shred of evidence that deities exist.

Answer 120

NO, you can't disprove God by logic or theories. This is a fools task. This is a 1 Corinthians 2:14 question again.

Answer 121

Who claims the existence of something should prove it. Not the other way around

Answer 122

No...

Answer 123

I think I have irrefutable PROOF that God is real: How else do you explain that one cell from your mother and one cell from your father created the person you are today ???

Answer 124

If, in your Update #2, you admit that neither atheists nor non-atheists can prove 100% that God exists, then why are you worrying about it? NO ONE can prove it, one way or the other. Only the dead know 100%, and they're not telling.

Answer 125

Naturally I can't speak for all atheists, only our atheist pope can do that, but for myself, can't say that I am all that interested in disproving the existence of gods. There is no indication any have ever existed, I do not think any do or will exist in the future, and I doubt anyone would really change much about their behavior or attitude if there was any indication of gods.

.

Answer 126

"I refuse to prove that I exist, " says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.”

Answer 127

1. The oscillating universe theory. To me it is the best theory to explain causation.

2. The laws of thermodynamics, conservation of energy principle.

3. The observation of planets and stars undergoing stages of formation, with no intelligent force behind this.

4. The observation of fossils showing transitory life forms.

5. Carbon dating.



That's the evidence that there is No Creator external to universal Creators.

Answer 128

Depends on the god. If you mean the christian moron there is room for debate. By christian logic there is means to prove your god does not exist or at least that he is no god. You claim the bible is the word of god. You claim jesus is the son of god. Your son of god promised that if you ask anything in my name god will do it. Since jesus supposedly cannot lie and the bible cannot lie that makes unanswered prayer proof that god either no longer exists or is no god. The same can be said for all the other promises in the bible that do not work. If you can't trust them on little things like this you should not trust them in bigger Issues like Heaven.

Answer 129

Now - what did you learn on your homeschool course about 'proving a negative'?

Answer 130

Nope, just like Christians can't prove that Odin is not the one true All-Father, that the world did not come into existence on the back of a giant space tortoise, and that leprechauns exist.

Answer 131

No, but most of them aren't claiming that at a level that requires that they prove it.



Some atheists are making a positive claim of "There is absolutely no God". This is a claim that would require proof that they, in fact, cannot give.



Other atheists are merely making the claim "I do not believe in a God. If there is a God, I do not know about or worship same." This is a claim that... well, the most proof it would need would be a lie detector test. They are not claiming anything positive about the ultimate nature of reality, they are merely stating their own beliefs. No proof required.

Answer 132

"Can atheists actually prove that there is no God?"



No but they can disprove any testable god, so far. Or at least this Agnostic can do that.



There was no Great Flood thus ALL gods that entail a Great Flood are disproved. That includes Jehovah the most popular god.

Answer 133

Ok. Hey, God. You created the universe, right? You can do anything, right? Ok. Turn my white skin black when I snap my fingers. Snap! Nothing. Created night and day but can't change my skin color. He must not exist. Proof there is no God.

Answer 134

No, they deny God's existence. Every person knows God is real, atheists choose to pretend he doesn't exist.

Answer 135

All that atheism says is that we don't believe that gods exist. You're right in saying that someone claiming there are positively no gods is shouldering a burden of proof, but the vast majority of atheists don't say that. There's a world of difference between saying a) I don't believe in gods, and b) There are no gods.

.

We don't have to. The only thing agnostic atheists have to notice is that the believers can't make their case that gods exist, and that the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive claim.

.

.

Answer 136

Proving that there is no god, is like proving why 2+2=3 is incorrect, because it simply just is.



It makes no sense.

Answer 137

Nope.

Answer 138

we dont need to darwin did that for us back in the 1800s! :)

Answer 139

One can prove the non-existence of the God of the Bible (which is not quite your question).

If I said: "I have a pet with elbows but no limbs; everyday uses of these words,” you would correctly deduce that I did not have the pet described. This does not mean that I have no pet, of course: merely that I don't have the one described.

In the same way, if I said there is a being which is all-knowing and which exists alongside free-will, that is impossible in just the same way that elbows but no limbs is impossible, so you would know that this being does not exist as described.

The Bible states that God knows everything including all our decisions before we make them (starting points e.g. Ps 139:1-4, 1 John 3:19-20, 1 Kings 8:39, Job 37:15-16, Isaiah 46:9-10) and also that we have free will (e.g. Gen 4:6-7, Deut 30:19, Josh 24:15). That these cannot both be true may be obvious; if not:

Arthur supposes that he has free will. Bob knows everything: past, present and future including, of course, the process and outcome of all Arthur’s future decisions.

> Arthur has a choice between tea and coffee.

> Bob must know what Arthur will choose, of course. (If Bob does not know or chooses not to know Arthur’s future decision, he does not know everything.) Let’s say it's coffee.

So could Arthur in fact have chosen tea?

> If YES: Bob is not all-knowing: there was knowledge he did not possess.

> If NO: Arthur does not have free will.

It really is that simple. That Arthur has free will and that Bob knows everything cannot both be true. Sure, Arthur may feel like he has free-will, but if Bob is all-knowing then it’s illusory.

The Bible therefore says two contradictory things about the nature of God: that he operates in a world in which people have free will, and that he operates in a world in which he knows all and therefore no people have free will. The God characterised in the Bible does not exist.

Again, this does not mean that no gods exist, just that the one characterized in the Bible does not.

Answer 140

The thing is that Atheists do not need to prove anything or for that matter try to convince or convert others to our way of being. What others believe is of no consequence.

Answer 141

Not our job.

Answer 142

No, because you can't prove a negative. It is up to the person making the positive claim to provide the proof. In other words, if you want me to worship your God, you have to show me what I'm worshipping.

Answer 143

No they cannot, but they are always asking Christians for proof for the existence for the Triune God of the Bible, aka, Yahweh - God as Christians understand Him, , The Creator of all that is seen and unseen, affectionately referred to as Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Our atheist friends, the walking dead, should be pleased to know that He welcomes all sinners, but they insist that they don't sin, but we all know they are lying through their false teeth.

They are also well aware of His terms, which are non negotiable:- Accept that you are a sinner in need of redemption. Truly repent and confess your sins to God. Accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior and be born again of the Holy Spirit. God will then make Himself known to you in a first-hand, purely unique and personal way. Scoffers and mockers of Christianity, at last, an opportunity to find out for yourself that The God Yahweh of the Bible does truly exist. What are you waiting for?

Answer 144

Sure, atheists can actually prove that there is no god, that is, if it is the god of the Bible that you are referring to.



That is because the Bible describes a god-created cosmos that does not actually exist. Since that cosmos is a manifestation and attribute of that god, the god who created the nonexisting biblical cosmos does not exist either.



Note: Because only a few verses would not make the case, the material below is necessarily quite extensive and shows that the Bible has a consistent view of the structure of the cosmos throughout, with parts that are fully consistent with each other. That structural consistency indicates that it accurately represents the cosmos as conceived by the writers of the Bible.



According to Ecclesiastes 1:5 the sun goes (hasteth) around the earth



"The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose"



--as, of course, it must, since, according to Ps 93:1, Ps 96:10, and 1 Chr 16:30, the earth does not move. And the earth cannot move because, according to 1 Samuel 2:8 and Ps 75:3, it is placed on pillars. And because it is placed on pillars, it has an underside and an upper side, as confirmed by Isaiah 40:22 which indicates that the earth is a circle--i.e., a flat disk.



That is also confirmed by Proverbs 8:27, which describes god as beginning the creation of the world when he "drew a circle on the face of the deep" (ESV). The Hebrew word translated as “circle,” "compass, “ and “horizon” in the different Bibles is the same word used for circle in Isaiah 40:22. The ancient Hebrews would have gotten the idea of a circular earth by viewing the horizon from the top of a mountain.



(The Hebrew word translated as "circle" in Isaiah 40:22 is chuwg, which means "circle" not "sphere." Strong's Concordance: "circle"..."describe a circle." Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament: "Circle...the earth conceived as a disc, Is 40:22." Hebrew-Aramaic and English Lexicon of the Old Testament: "draw round, make a circle." If Isaiah actually meant "sphere" he could have used the Hebrew word duwr, meaning "ball" as he did in Isaiah 22:18.)



(But what is particularly significant is that the Jewish scholars who translated the Hebrew scriptures into the Greek Septuagint during the third century B.C. used the Greek word gyron--γῦρον--meaning circle, instead of "sphaíra"--σφαίρα--meaning sphere, for their translation of the Hebrew chuwg in Isaiah 40:22. So those scholars CLEARLY understood what Isaiah was saying, in contrast to those today who ignorantly say that chuwg means "sphere.")



Underneath the flat disk of the earth is the abyss, the bottomless pit, which is referred to several times in the Bible (ex. Rev. 9:1,2).



That is also what is being referred to in Job 26:7 when it says that the earth hangs over nothing. (The Hebrew word translated "upon" in the KJV also means "over.") The actual sphere of the earth in space is not "suspended' or "hanging" "over" or "upon" nothing. It is orbiting the sun at 66,700 miles per hour. If the earth can be considered "hanging" over anything, it is the sun, which certainly is NOT nothing.



Several other verses in the Bible also indicate the earth is flat, such as Nebuchadnezzar's vision in Dan 4:10-11 (the tree could not be seen from all the earth if it were not flat). Dan 2:28 states that the visions of Nebuchadnezzar are from God. If the biblical god says the biblical earth is flat, it must be flat.



The original Hebrew word translated as firmament is raqiya, which is a noun derived from the Hebrew word raqa. That word is a verb meaning "to beat out," and is used in the bible in reference to beating out metal into plates or expanses of the metal (as in Exodus 39:3). So raqiya, as a noun, would literally mean "that which is beaten out."



The biblical firmament, or sky, is therefore a solid, beaten out expanse or vault set on the rim of the flat disk of the earth. That is confirmed in Job 37:18, which states:



"Can you beat out the vault of the skies as he does,

hard as a mirror of cast metal?" (New English Bible).



There, the Hebrew word translated as "beat out" (or "spread out" in other versions) is, as noted above, raqa.



The solid, or firm, nature of the biblical firmament is also indicated by Proverbs 8:27-28:



27. When he established the heavens...

28. When he made firm the skies above... [ASV, ESV, NRSV, NASV, NAB]



The Hebrew word translated as "firm" there is amats, which has a meaning of "be hard".



The solid vault of heaven is also implied in verses such as Deut 4:32:



"Ask now about the former days, long before your time, from the day God created man on the earth; ask from one end of the heavens to the other. Has anything so great as this ever happened, or has anything like it ever been heard of?"



The "ends of heaven" would be the base of the vault of heaven where it rests on the rim of the disk of the earth.



See also Ps 19:1-6, Isaiah 13:4-5, and, particularly, Matt 24:31, which states Jesus as saying:



"And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."



The elect are those on the earth who will be saved in the last days. Jesus is saying there that the angels would gather the elect from all over the earth, from one side, or end, of the base of the vault of heaven to the other side or end, from the east, west, north, and south, which is what the reference to the four winds means.



Isaiah 34:4 likewise indicates that the firmament is solid rather than being the upper atmosphere or the emptiness of space.



"the skies will roll up like a scroll,

and all the stars will fall"



The material making up the vault of the firmament will roll up, and the stars that were attached to it will fall to the earth.



The solid vault of heaven has a specific purpose in the Bible. As the Genesis story in chapter one indicates, the whole cosmos consisted of water before the creation process began. As it is described in the Genesis creation story, god created the firmament of heaven on the second day so it would hold back the waters above the firmament when he created the earth on the third day.



6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.



So that passage clearly indicates that the purpose of the solid firmament was to hold back the waters above the heaven. Furthermore, those waters continued to exist in the biblical cosmos, as indicated by Psalm 104:1-3 and Psalm 148:4. Also, the firmament of heaven has windows that are opened to let the water above the firmament fall as rain, as indicated by Genesis 7:11 and 8:2,



The stars in the biblical cosmos are just lights set in the firmament. As mere lights in the sky, they will fall to the earth in the Last Days (Matt 24:29), which conflicts with finding that the actual stars are other suns and many times larger than the earth.



So, according to the Bible the earth is a flat, immovable disk, supported by pillars and covered with a solid vault of heaven, the rim of which is is resting on the perimeter of the disk of the earth, and the stars are just lights set in the vault of heaven.



That this is the correct view of the biblical cosmos is shown by the fact that it describes a structure with parts that are fully consistent with each other. That structural consistency indicates that it accurately represents the cosmos as conceived by the ancient Hebrews and as its writers incorporated that view in the Bible.



In addition, according to the Bible, earth is the centerpiece of creation and in the Last Days god will destroy the earth and the heavens and create a new heaven and earth as part of his plan for mankind. (2 Peter 3:10-13).



Is that really realistic considering the vastness of the universe and its enormous number of galaxies? In the actual universe that science has uncovered, the earth is an insignificant mote, even more insignificant than the size of an atom is with respect to the size of the earth. Watch this three-minute video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9gy_BOnEOM&app=desktop



It is the height of geocentric IDIOCY to think that the whole universe was created merely for the sake of the earth and its inhabitants.



All of which goes to show that the cosmos of the Bible does not exist, and therefore, since that cosmos is an attribute and a manifestation of that god, that god does not exist either.



So, if one fully accepts the modern, present-day view of the universe as factual, then one would have to conclude that the Bible reflects the ignorant, myth-based beliefs of its writers and is not the word of god.

.

Answer 145

1: "Logic" is incapable on its own of demonstrating that something either exists or doesn't exist. It takes evidence. As things that don't exist don't leave evidence of their non-existence, the burden of proof (you know, "Logic") is always on the assertive claim.

2: Because of that, it does not require faith to reject a claim that has never met its burden of proof.

3: In the real world, there is no such thing as 100% certainty - about pretty much anything. Any such claim requires your "leap of faith."

4: Because of these points, I have never actually heard an atheist claim what you seem to think every one of them claims. Which is why virtually all adult atheists will identify as "agnostic atheists."

Answer 146

Of the thousands upon thousands of gods mankind has created and worshipped who have not already been resigned to myth, lore and legend or simply forgotten which mankind is born without the need of, only contracting this need upon prolonged exposure to those already infected are you attempting to validate or do you really believe yours is the only one!

Answer 147

No, because you obviously can't prove a negative.



Consider these facts, however:

• There is no objective evidence of a god. None. You can argue that this or that proves the existence of a god, but that's only your subjective opinion.

• If there WAS a god, why wouldn't he/she show himself/herself?

• If there was a god, which of the 10,000 gods is the actual one that exists?

• Again assuming there was a god, why should it matter to humans? If the god was truly superior to us, it wouldn't care if we worshiped it, since it should logically be intellectually "above" that.

• What is the nature of a god? A virus can't perceive the nature of a mouse. A mouse can't perceive the nature of a human being. So how could a human perceive the nature of a god?



This last thought leads us to an obvious conclusion: since we can never know what a god is like, speculation on the subject, while intellectually stimulating, is ultimately futile.

Answer 148

Well, I think atheists are able to prove that to the extent that there is not a scintilla of a shred of empirical evidence FOR the existence of God, so why should one for one minute believe that there is a God, ergo - there is no God.

Answer 149

No, why should we?



You're clearly confusing atheism with hard atheism.. not many people are actually hard atheists, and the few that are simply don't understand what constitutes proof.

Answer 150

We're not trying to do that, Skippy. We're not the ones making a positive assertions - that's the other team. Hop!

Answer 151

No, because the Bible already proves His existence.

Answer 152

things that don't exist don't leave evidence for their non-existence.....gods are imaginary...religion is pretend

Answer 153

Beautifying j

Answer 154

I am not 100% sure there is no God, because that has never been proved, and I would be happy if there was proof one way or another. It would be nice if there was a God.

Answer 155

Asking to prove that something DOESN'T exist is rather hard isn't. It's just bloody obvious.



Prove to me logically that nobody called Mary-Bob who had a birthmark with fortune telling powers in the shape of a tree on her chin ever existed in the history of mankind. I believe she exists because I can think it, so by your logic you should be able to show why she doesn't

Answer 156

The burden of proof is just a legal term that was first used in the 15th century and used a lot more loosely now. Reasonable evidence is required as to the existence of God. The atheist thinks he holds a trump card when he tells you that he can't be expected to prove a negative so the burden of proof is yours. That is incorrect and far too easy a cop out. That phrase does not cover as much as the atheist thinks it does.



If you come on Q&A and say There is a god, you are quite likely to get the same bog standard "prove it?" question. If you ask the atheist to prove there is no God, he will deny he has to give this proof. The burden of proof legal term can not be used here. You are within your rights to ask who created everything if it was not God and if you receive an answer, it is equally your right to ask the atheist to prove that answer.?



A court would find your bible to be reasonable evidence and the atheist would lose the argument as he has no evidence that God does not exist. The burden of proof was only a sentence put to together by a clever lawyer in the 15th century and does not have much standing now. Atheists seem not to have a grip on the words they use or where those words and phrases came from.



You have to remember, the "burden of proof" phrase was first said in a court at a time when a chicken could be held as a witness and the defendant could be executed if the chicken refused to speak up. A time where you may see a horse charged with throwing and killing his owner then taken to the gallows and hung because it refused to prove its innocence. An atheist has no trump card that works in his defence and automatically proves his argument. If you need proof there is no God, ask the atheist for proof. If he can't prove that God does not exist, give him a pat on the head and get on with what you were doing. You have no burden.

Answer 157

Nope

Answer 158

Nope

Just like believers can not prove there is a God