Proof for God's Non-existance?

quote:

---

As I noted in Message 216 the claim isn't very specific. It keeps changing.

​

But what you aren't addressing is the point I made in Message 216 and Message 223. What you are pulling from the scriptures is the past. Christians claimed a god exists today.

​

Documents that are over 2000 years old are not evidence for a god that exists today.

​

That's why I feel that the fact that Christians can only reference ancient documents for specifics on their god and for supposed evidence supports my premise that gods are fictional characters.

​

If you want to discount my position, you need to show evidence that shows a god exists currently today, in the present.

---

That's an interesting statement. I'm not sure of the implications at this point however. Perhaps the issue is progressive, ie. If God exist(ed) then can He continue to exist to this day etc etc. However, it seems as though we are delving into the markup of God the entity which falls out of the scope of this argument.

Sorry but all you seem to be doing is trying to palm the pea in the hope that no one notices.In reference to historical records I said

quote:

---

Right, we need to evaluate them based on external evidence. That is what you have never presented.

---

To which your replied: I'm sorry but that is a silly, irrelevant, incorrect, contradictory and misrepresentative paragraph all at once. I would not have thought that possible. No, of course not. That is why I said that you check its validity by testing it against outside evidence, external material.It is that outside evidence, that external material that you have NEVER presented. Whether or not a record is preserved is irrelevant. The fact that some record is there tells us nothing about whether or not it is factual. You even go on and point out exactly what I have been saying all along, to wit: Outside evidence, external material, those things which can be tested to determine the possible validity of a document.It is that outside evidence, the external material, that you have never presented.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

My answer was in response to this statement

quote:

---

Nonsense. If you look you will find that everyone of them DOES have a provenance. Each of those you mentioned requires independent verification, so Judge, Doctor, Recorder, Lawyer or Inspector must sign off on them, independently confirming their veracity.

---

Which was clearly wrong where public records and archives are concerned.It's quite simple really. The claim or document(scripture), was written and preserved throughout history as a record. The evidence is the fact that we exist today.If you are saying that we are incapable of evaluating the validity of this claim due to the fact that it has long past, then you are wrong. We can observe this by looking at our existing treatment of written records and historical archives which share similar criteria. So we do have the capacity to evaluate past documents on a number of criteria.

Um, no it is not. Public records are vetted, notarized, signed off by an inspector, a judge, a doctor, a coroner. Um, no. The fact that we exist today is evidence that we exist today. It in no way validates much else. Not at all. I say we can and have tested the validity of the "Bible" (as though such a thing as "The Bible" even existed) and it has been shown to be inaccurate on many historical issues.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Um, no it is not. Public records are vetted, notarized, signed off by an inspector, a judge, a doctor, a coroner.

---

Well that partially true. Now what about the older records? Are you under the impression that they are discarded because they were issued or created prior to notarization and authentication?

Not at all. But their validity is tested against outside evidence, external material, and that is what you have never produced.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Are you under the impression that it is my responsibility to provide external evidence for this claim? Your determination to gain ground is notable, however pointless in the face of the argument. We have a claim that God created the heavens and the earth(Gen 1:1). It has been written(recorded) and preserved to this day. having said this, you are fully entitled to dispute this claim and present your argument against it(if you so wanted). However, don't be misled into thinking I am somehow responsible for upholding it.The original poster stated

quote:

---

I would like any Atheists to post their proof of God's non-existence in this thread. Then, we can evaluate each piece of evidence just like for Theists, and determine if the evidence is any good or not.

---

The claim was made that God created the Heavens and the Earth. The evidence is that we exist today. So I wonder now, if anyone is actually going to present evidence to contradict this claim or are we going to continue on circumventing the issue.

Um, yes. LOLMany fables and many authors have claimed that some god did something or the other.So far no evidence has been presented to support such claims.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

But their validity is tested against outside evidence, external material, and that is what you have never produced.

---

As I said, you need to educate yourself on matters before making assumptions.

I'm sorry but the validity of any claim is based on testing that claim against outside evidence and external material.And that is what you have never produced.You have never produced any evidence that the so called "entity" exists or the the so called "entity" even made such a claim.All you have presented is evidence that the authors of stories made the claim that such an "entity exists" and that "the entity made such a claim".

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Many fables and many authors have claimed that some god did something or the other.

​

So far no evidence has been presented to support such claims.

---

Very good, now your back in contradiction with the public archive system. Joe Smith was the builder of a saloon called the May West. We have no evidence that Joe ever built the May West except that Jerry Maguire referenced Joe building it and so on and so forth. The may West no longer exists though it has been mentioned in countless other documents.In your statement you claim that we have no evidence to support that the Joe Smith ever existed or built the May West. However, in this case, God created the Heavens and the earth, and the earth exists. So we do have a form of evidence for that claim.If the May West existed today, would this have any impact on the claim made my Joe Smith? Would it classified as external evidence for that claim?

False. You have presented no evidence that God exists or that God created the heavens and the earth.The fact that the earth exists is only evidence that the earth exists.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

What a stupid statement. I live in an apartment. If I claim I built the apartment, does my apartment's existence prove I actually built it? If I claim I built the apartment before the actual builder comes and says "well, actually no, I built it," does my claim somehow carry more weight?If I claim I built a rock, or a mountain, does the existence of the rock or mountain prove I created either? Does it prove either were created at all? What if nobody else ever claims to be the rock- or mountain-maker, becasue they clearly formed by natural means all on their own. Since Im the only claimant, is my claim valid?Your logic is severely flawed, pbee.

---

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

quote:

---

What a stupid statement. I live in an apartment. If I claim I built the apartment, does my apartment's existence prove I actually built it? If I claim I built the apartment before the actual builder comes and says "well, actually no, I built it," does my claim somehow carry more weight?

---

No it does not *prove you built it, where do you come up with this idea? let's not be petty about this and keep it real. The evidence(your apartments) gives status to your claim. The results on whether or not you built it are left in the evaluation of the claim. You could be wrong... or you could be right.

quote:

---

If I claim I built a rock, or a mountain, does the existence of the rock or mountain prove I created either? Does it prove either were created at all? What if nobody else ever claims to be the rock- or mountain-maker, becasue they clearly formed by natural means all on their own. Since Im the only claimant, is my claim valid?

---

Same answer as the previous applies here.It's interesting how people get defensive in the face of such an argument. It's not as though I brought anything new to the table is it? We are dealing with nothing more than personal feelings at this stage.

quote:

---

Your logic is severely flawed, pbee.

---

I will reserve my defense at this time by simply saying.. "I doubt it".

quote:

---

False. You have presented no evidence that God exists or that God created the heavens and the earth.

​

The fact that the earth exists is only evidence that the earth exists.

---

That's correct. However, the fact that the claim references our existence as the evidence has no impact on admissibility of the document in question. Just as the "May West" illustration demonstrated, even without a claimant, a document or record does remain open for appraisal.Since the document does indeed exist, the option of dismissal is no longer available. In Joe's case, despite the lack thereof evidence for his existence(physical body etc.) we were able to raise evaluate the documents status by means of cross referencing and evidence. Likewise the original claim can be treated accordingly.So as the original poster stated

quote:

---

I would like any Atheists to post their proof of God's non-existence in this thread. Then, we can evaluate each piece of evidence just like for Theists, and determine if the evidence is any good or not.

---

I would like to see the evidence atheists have to support the claim that God does not exist. We have waisted 254 posts circumventing the issue, now I would like to see someone intellectually honest step up and lay it on the line.