Proof god doesn't exist

[El_Machinae]

The bible will lengthen your longevity by infinite times.

Nuh uh!

 

[Myzenium]

My, you have a lot of questions for a guy who would think to know more than Christians.

When did I ever say this?

You didn't. I can sense a lot about people in their actions, and yours are dubious. If you wanted an apology, here it is: I'm sorry that you don't know my point of view, so there's no need to ask me pointless questions.

Think what you will about my mind, but your answer is a cop-out and doesn't really answer the question. Does no man know the will of God because 1) God is actively hiding himself from us or 2) because we're too simple to understand God's signs when we see them?

Originally you implied that 1) was true, now you're saying that 2) is true. Well, which is it?

You think my opinion is critical to this debate? It doesn't really matter what I say, because a God could exist, though there would be no proof of it. That suicide you read about in the paper last week could have been a homicide, but there's no way to know for sure because the body was cremated without autopsy. Who can say whether justice is served every time? We can't; we can only make blind assumptions.

We can either assume that God exists, or we can assume the widely accepted view that the Universe had no creator. IMO, both views are valid at this time.

You don't want answers; you want to debate. I said it once, and I'll say it again. The good stuff is documented. If you're curious, read an expert's account. I'm a layman.

And here's my answer to the question: you're misparaphrasing. God doesn't give us signs. So the question that I will answer is, "Does no man know the will of God because God is actively hiding himself from us?" No. To know the will of God, you need to know that God is speaking, and you need to listen. Since God has traditionally given humanity revelation through the mouth of a person, it is impossible to know for certain whether the prophets have stated God's will, or something else. In other words, no, I have not seen God. I have faith that he exists, but no proof. I don't know why God hides himself, so I chalk it up to not knowing God's will. If God can reason, which I believe he can, then God can certainly hide himself easily.

I hope that satisfies you, warpus. Again, if you want to say I have a circular argument, I could point out some of yours.

Let's play a little game. I'm the secularist, and you're the Christian. How does the Bible prove that God exists?

If the Bible said something like: "And every Sunday morning, the Lord cometh down to the Earth to take a bath in the Ainsworth hot springs in BC, Canada." and we actually witnessed a being coming down from the sky every sunday morning and taking a bath in the hot springs, AND if this phenomenon could not be explianed by science, that'd be pretty powerful evidence that the Bible was telling the truth in that regard and this could be regarded as a piece of evidence for the existence of God.

We have no such evidence though.

You have a weird notion of what a book should tell. Most works of non-fiction outline past events. Their authors then use the data to predict the future, and their predictions are usually wrong.

(BTW, the Bible is on the non-fiction shelf in my public library. Don't play that card.)

 

[warpus]

You didn't. I can sense a lot about people in their actions, and yours are dubious.

Don't put words in my mouth then. Thanks

because a God could exist, though there would be no proof of it.

That's possible, but assuming we are talking about the Christian God then considering what sort of miraculous events have been described in the Bible, you would expect to see some proof from time to time, unless God decided to go into hiding right after the Bible was published.

What you say is possible, yet unlikely, given the facts.

I would say what you suggest would be far more plausible if we went with the assumption that the Bible is full of made up stories.

Since God has traditionally given humanity revelation through the mouth of a person, it is impossible to know for certain whether the prophets have stated God's will, or something else.

Really? I've read plenty in the Bible about burning bushes, people coming back to life, water being turned into wine, and so forth.

I hope that satisfies you, warpus. Again, if you want to say I have a circular argument, I could point out some of yours.

There you go again putting words in my mouth I've never suggested that you're using a circular argument. When you do, I"ll be sure to point it out

And if you see using such a fallacy, be sure to point it out. We all use make use of faulty logic from time to time without even realizing it - it's a public service to point this stuff out.

(BTW, the Bible is on the non-fiction shelf in my public library. Don't play that card.)

The Bible is in the non-fiction shelf in my public library, therefore God exists.

That is a fallacy right there

 

[El_Machinae]

Oh, but it's an obvious and funny fallacy.
I'm starting to enjoy this fellow's wit.

 

[Myzenium]

Don't put words in my mouth then. Thanks

Please return the favor, and stop putting words in mine.

That's possible, but assuming we are talking about the Christian God then considering what sort of miraculous events have been described in the Bible, you would expect to see some proof from time to time, unless God decided to go into hiding right after the Bible was published.

What you say is possible, yet unlikely, given the facts.

I would say what you suggest would be far more plausible if we went with the assumption that the Bible is full of made up stories.

"Unlikely"? Evolution is unlikely, yet billions of people believe it. Don't make me pull out Darwin on you.

"You would expect to see some proof"? There you go again. Why do you think that everything allegedly true should leave a trail of evidence? Why do you think that evidence can be found quickly and easily over your lifetime?

There you go again putting words in my mouth I've never suggested that you're using a circular argument. When you do, I"ll be sure to point it out

And if you see using such a fallacy, be sure to point it out. We all use make use of faulty logic from time to time without even realizing it - it's a public service to point this stuff out.

We've already covered that. I repeat verbatim: "Let me tell you a little secret. Everyone sane has circular arguments. You have them; I have them." So I'm saying it's okay. You don't have to justify your circular arguments just as I don't have to justify mine. It's pointless.

You have a weird notion of what a book should tell. Most works of non-fiction outline past events. Their authors then use the data to predict the future, and their predictions are usually wrong.

(BTW, the Bible is on the non-fiction shelf in my public library. Don't play that card.)

The Bible is in the non-fiction shelf in my public library, therefore God exists.

That is a fallacy right there

This is one of a few examples where you put words in my mouth.

The "card" was you claiming that because the Bible was in the FICTION section in YOUR library, that I am out of touch. It was an easy put-down, and I didn't want to allow you the privilege of using it. So I said, "Don't play that card." And you didn't.

Last edited by warpus : Oct 12, 2006 at 12:47 PM

You're editing your posts with new statements. Take a minute, relax, and proofread in the future. I can't respond correctly if you don't think through your posts.

And here's my answer to the question: you're misparaphrasing. God doesn't give us signs. So the question that I will answer is, "Does no man know the will of God because God is actively hiding himself from us?" No. To know the will of God, you need to know that God is speaking, and you need to listen. Since God has traditionally given humanity revelation through the mouth of a person, it is impossible to know for certain whether the prophets have stated God's will, or something else.

Really? I've read plenty in the Bible about burning bushes, people coming back to life, water being turned into wine, and so forth.

If you're going to quote me, quote me in full.

Do you believe those stories, warpus? I don't think you do. I said "God doesn't give us signs." Those events you mentioned are not signs unless you see them first-hand. Those events are testimony. Little kids know how to lie, therefore it is possible to have flawed testimony.

 

[Swiss_Mercenari]

If there really is such a thing as gravity, how come people have different names for it? Like, you know, in other languages and stuff?

I mean that there is Vishnu, Shiva, Odin, Artemis, and other names for deities. And when translated, they do not mean the same as God. But when gravity is translated, it means the same thing. Does that answer your question? And how can you deny gravity?

 

[warpus]

"You would expect to see some proof"? There you go again. Why do you think that everything allegedly true should leave a trail of evidence? Why do you think that evidence can be found quickly and easily over your lifetime?

Read your Bible. God pops up all the time, performs a great variety of miracles, destroys entire cities, turns water to wine, raises people from the dead, floods the entire earth, sends plagues onto Egypt, etc etc etc.

Either

1.) None of that is true
2.) God went into hiding after the Bible was published

We've already covered that. I repeat verbatim: "Let me tell you a little secret. Everyone sane has circular arguments. You have them; I have them." So I'm saying it's okay. You don't have to justify your circular arguments just as I don't have to justify mine. It's pointless.

Circular arguments should be avoided - so please, if you see me using one, please point it out.

You're editing your posts with new statements. Take a minute, relax, and proofread in the future. I can't respond correctly if you don't think through your posts.

I didn't get much sleep last night and I ended up quoting something from you without even responding. So I went to fix that. Deal with it.

 

[Urederra]

The OP should read David Hume to improve his case.

One of the oldest and most popular arguments for the existence of God is the design argument – that all the order and 'purpose' in the world bespeaks a divine origin. A modern manifestation of this belief is creationism Hume gave the classic criticism of the design argument in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion and An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and though the issue is far from dead in modern debate, many are convinced that Hume killed the argument for good. Here are some of his points:
For the design argument to be feasible, it must be true that order and purpose are observed only when they result from design. But order is observed regularly, resulting from presumably mindless processes like snowflake or crystal generation. Design accounts for only a tiny part of our experience with order and 'purpose'.
Furthermore, the design argument is based on an incomplete analogy: because of our experience with objects, we can recognise human-designed ones, comparing for example a pile of stones and a brick wall. But in order to point to a designed Universe, we would need to have an experience of a range of different universes. As we only experience one, the analogy cannot be applied.
Even if the design argument is completely successful, it could not (in and of itself) establish a robust theism; one could easily reach the conclusion that the universe's configuration is the result of some morally ambiguous, possibly unintelligent agent or agents whose method bears only a remote similarity to human design.
If a well-ordered natural world requires a special designer, then God's mind (being so well-ordered) also requires a special designer. And then this designer would likewise need a designer, and so on ad infinitum. We could respond by resting content with an inexplicably self-ordered divine mind; but then why not rest content with an inexplicably self-ordered natural world?
Often, what appears to be purpose, where it looks like object X has feature F in order to secure some outcome O, is better explained by a filtering process: that is, object X wouldn't be around did it not possess feature F, and outcome O is only interesting to us as a human projection of goals onto nature. This mechanical explanation of teleology anticipated natural selection. (see also Anthropic principle)

In my opinion, it is very difficult, not to say impossible, to prove that something you can't precieve with any or your senses does not exist.

 

[punkbass2000]

I haven't read the entire thread, but:

It also means that each earlier god was ore powerfull than his successor god barring the belief that god has absolute power.

doesn't necessarily follow. There is nothing to say that one (god or otherwise) cannot create something more "powerful" than oneself. Indeed, the term "powerful" is probably too vague an abstraction to be meaningfully used as a syllogical catalyst in this context.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

A little point I'd like to comment on:

You can't hold or touch an electron either, so "can't touch it" doesn't necessarily mean "can't be explained with science"

Can you define this boundary?

I don't think this boundary exists. This is partly due to my being a hacker. I acknowledge very few boundaries. I see "At one end of the spectrum we have something with property A, and at the other end property A is not present", and I see people drawing lines across it, often in the grey zone where they haven't seen the gap bridged yet (for example software is patentable, mathematics is not) , but also at one end or the other so that their lines won't be ambiguous (abortion bans).

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

First of all, I recommend that all the atheists here read The Great Divorce. It is a good book and explains how Christians feel about heaven. You don't have to agree with all of the fundamental premises of a book to read it.

Second, no one understood my gravity example. It wasn't supposed to be literal. I mean that just because God did not reveal THIS (I am using this from now one to mean Them/Him/It/She, it looks cooler) fully to everyone on earth in the same way doesn't mean THIS doesn't exist. We all view God differently because we all view everything differently.

 

[CartesianFart]

First of all, I recommend that all the atheists here read The Great Divorce. It is a good book and explains how Christians feel about heaven. You don't have to agree with all of the fundamental premises of a book to read it.

First of all,I recommend that all the christians here read The Great Marriage.It is a good book and explains how athiest think about reason.You don't have to deconstruct many premises of the book to understand.

The author is CartesianFart by the way.

 

[Myzenium]

Read your Bible.

So you're saying I don't read my Bible?

Either

1.) None of that [Bible] is true
2.) God went into hiding after the Bible was published

I don't quite follow you, and I'm not going to make up option 3. I don't expect you to understand me, because I certainly don't understand you.

 

[Grey Fox]

God does have a creator. Man. Homo Sapiens. Humanity. We created him the same way we created all other beliefs we had before and after God.

 

[Sidhe]

God does have a creator. Man. Homo Sapiens. Humanity. We created him the same way we created all other beliefs we had before and after God.

It's a nice idea but can you prove it? There in lies the rub

Did man create God in his own image or God man?

 

[King Flevance]

What if I pick the wrong religion/God to follow, will I still get a revelation?

I think it is possible but not as likely. It would depend on the importance of the message. God can give an atheist a message if He wanted to but it would be passed off as a "freaky coincidence". If he really wanted to, he could send them an awesome vision of angels n Heaven and Jesus himself to speak with them. WHere they would then say "Wow, I should go get myself checked out." Once it was over thinking they were crazy.
Having a vision in our world automatically makes a person dillusional. Sometimes even being the person who recieves it, it is easy to feel dillusional. Being an atheist only esculates this feeling. However, the simple answer is yes I think it is possible.

So after "the fall" God has stayed away from "our world" and not interfered in it? So how do you explain the events in the Bible then? Are you saying that nothing described in the Bible (that was post-fall) actually happened?

No he did come back. Before he came back, we were doomed to live our short lives however we saw fit and die in our sinful squaller. However, it was people like Abraham and Noah and Jacob that God liked. Even though they were doomed, they continued to live their lives for Him and honor Him. (also feared Him) All this when the world was bathing in sin with no divine guidance at all. They honored Him and He said "It is not right for me to let these people suffer when they try so hard."

EDIT:

Either

1.) None of that is true
2.) God went into hiding after the Bible was published

2. Sort of. God then had no reason attempt to save anyone not a follower. He had given humanity it's "proof". Remember that God exists outside of time so He handed proof to humanity, not individuals. To Him it is the same second that He gave us Jesus right at this moment for us. He isn't "sitting back waiting" at all. Our entire timeline is a permenant state of being to him.
How I see it: He is sititing in his throne or whatever and off to the side is a window to our demision He created. To Him, he just provided us with our proof as a whole this very second. We (pretty much Christians) have to work together to share the proof with everyone. This is where we get annoying to some people. I don't try to convert anyone ever as part of my personal message has been that salvation can only come to those who seek it. All a good christian can do is provide answers to people that are curious about the faith. By doing so I might lead them to the answers they seek in their life. Ideally, lead them to the source, God.

 

[warpus]

I don't quite follow you, and I'm not going to make up option 3. I don't expect you to understand me, because I certainly don't understand you.

Alright..

My initial point was that if there was a Christian God there surely would be some evidence to that effect, considering all the appearances and miracles talked about in the Bible. Surely those appearances and miracles would've continued into present day.

But then you say "Well, God could just be hiding from us, and that's why we don't see any evidence of him"

So either those appearances and miracles stopped due to God deciding to hide from us, after the Bible was published.. for some reason.. or the stories in the Bible aren't true in the first place.

 

[warpus]

God can give an atheist a message if He wanted to but it would be passed off as a "freaky coincidence".

So how do we distinguish between actual coincidences and messages from God?

Surely God can do better than a simple coincidence to make his presence felt.

 

[King Flevance]

So how do we distinguish between actual coincidences and messages from God?

The bible will teach you about God and what he sees as right and wrong. But don't make the mistake of thinking God is the only one communicating to you. Sometimes Satan can make these "coincedenses" too. And we don't know the difference. I ain't talking about "Kill so-and-so" either. He goes down as small as giving you a coinsidence that seems like a message of "Quit your job, I have other work I want you to do" and so stuff like that too. Satan has the ability to appear divine as well.

Let me go into a small example. In this example, you are Christian and recently prayed to God asking for financial guidance.

Example:
You get in your car and start it. Your radio is on a channel you don't normally listen too and volume is up all the way and isn't where you left it. You quickly turn it down and realize that the lyrics of this song just blared "GIVE TO CHARITY!" You would take this as a message that you must offer to sacrifice for others in the name of recieving any help with my own. (A common christian understanding. That is part of the word of God.)
Later that week, you pray and ask who to give the money to. The next morning you get in your car and the same thing happens with the message "Toy's for Tots" before you turn the radio down. So you give to Toys for Tots. You call a place to come and see why your radio is doing that. (Even a christian would do this. It is a broken radio, the message is what is important not the messenger. Fix your broke-ass radio.) Plus, wouldn't it be even "weirder" if the radio had nothing wrong with it? What a cool story right?
The next day you get in the car and the message is "Quit your job". Here is where being a christian and knowing God comes in. God does not like laziness. In genesis he even implies that it is payment for our sins. We are to slave over the land to work off our debt and women gotta have pain of giving birth and all that. This message is not divine. So you tell Satan to go suck a big fat one and go on about your day.

Part that gets tricky:
It may have been satan telling you to give to charity also. But the action was divine and you will be rewarded for it, don't worry. Maybe not in this lifetime but you will get a reward for that greater than what you gave up by alot. The important thing is to not doubt that God will deliver on this. That is the whole purpose satan even messed with you at all.

Just for fun:
When you took your radio into the shop, it had a short in it that was causing it to scan the tuner and the volume to go up. This doesn't make the message not divine. This shows you how God/Satan were able to manipulate time with science to communicate with you. This is how they do what they do, their language.

This is a vague example - alot of times the source of the message changes. (It shouldn't come only from the radio in this example and have a few more sources as well. But they are hard to think of.) But it may make the first part of my post make more since. He does work in strange ways. That is where the saying came from after all. I am just trying to relate what I meant by these coincedences.

Surely God can do better than a simple coincidence to make his presence felt.

He could but he doesn't see the point, I think. It is like unnecessary "bling". It honestly isn't about you kissing his feet and going "Woah! Hallelujah!" or anything like that. That just tends to happen when he is around. It is about caring about everything he has put around you. Working in harmony with everything - Him, yourself, and others.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

God will make His presence felt to those who are honestly seeking Him and want to do His will (ie take His advice) not just those who are curious or looking to make a point. Least that's how I feel.