Proof for God's Non-existance?

I think you are confusing matters. There is no concept of an unspecific god, only specific god suggested by specific people.So when some people say "god created the world in 7 days" and you look and find that the world was not created in 7 days, you have evidence to contradict their god.Lets compare it with something else. If you are asked to prove there is no milk in the refrigerator, you open it, and look inside. If there is no milk this is evidence of absence of milk.Now if you claim the existence of a god and you make claims like the one about milk. That is, there is some difference in what we would expect to see in the world should your god exist. If we do not not see these things predicted by your god hypothesis, then this is evidence against you hypothesis. In this way absence of evidence is indeed evidence, just like the milk that isn't in the fridge!If you suggest a god that is undetectable, then it cannot be falsified, but neither do we have any reason to believe you. I can think of a 100 entities whose existence would be undetectable, but my guess would be that you would not choose to believe any of them.I can recommend that you read Dawkins "the god delusion". He argues against the popular notion of gods, that is personal gods that act in the world, and specifically deals with difference between thos and the transcendent gods that have no effect on the world. The first class can be shown to not exist with good confidence, the other kind are just irrelevant to everyday life

"I would like any Atheists to post their proof of God's non-existence in this thread."Given that most other objections have been aired already, I would add only the following question: "Which God?"

God is set up to be an unprovable concept. According to most his power is such that if he wishes he may hide all vestige of his existence, therefore there is no way for anyone to prove that he is not there.The closest to 'proof' I have i suppose is the way I have seen some theists see god in anything they do not understand, and construct their own god out of carefully picked scripture and reasoning within their own mind. Though their god is the same in name, many seem to be worshiping entirely different deities as per their needs. To me this seems the most conclusive evidence of god as a construct of the mind*. Still, like many said, there can be no real proof of non existence.*although I suppose the same would be observed if god were 'asleep' or otherwise AWOLEdited by The Matt, : afterthought.

Interesting, but irrelevant.

Name me a prominent atheist by the definition as you understand it, I'd be interested to know.As I understand the definition I am an atheist since I affirm the nonexistence of god with the same force I affirm the nonexistence of any supernatural being. I also reject theism. I do not need evidence of God's nonexistence to affirm his nonexistence with this strength. If you consider yourself agnostic with regards to Santa, Vishnu, Leszi, Odin or Buffy the Vampire Slayer then that's fine - but I don't. I affirm that the above do not exist - do you demand evidence for this too? Why focus on God?Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

---

No - I don't believe a cosmic Jewish zombie can make me live forever if I eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that I accept him as my master, so he can then remove an evil force from my soul that is present in all of humanity because a dirt/rib woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree about 6,000 years ago just after the universe was created. Why should I?

Jon Since non-existence has no evidence {evidence can only be available for that which exists} then I maintain that there can only be evidence for God. Since there is no evidence for God then I say that there is no god. I cannot, however, say that there is no god by giving evidence {proof} for it since by definition of non existence there can never be any.The only "proof" for God's non existence is tentative and dependent upon the submission of a proof for God's existence.
God does not exist until there is proof he does.

---

quote:

---

I quess I'll be the first to tell you, Jon, that you can't prove a negative.

---

Not so. Negatives are no harder or easier to prove than anything else (and, in fact, the very statement "you can't prove a negative" is self-refuting, if you can't prove a negative how could you prove it?). I can, for example, prove it is impossible to square the circle, or that there is no hippo on my keyboard.

The evidence for the non-existence of god is very straight forward: there is no evidence for the existence of god. The universe around us gives every impression that it is operates entirely by physical law, without any supernatural element. There might be a god, it is not possible to be certain there isn't, but if there is a god he's a pretty trivial creature taking no active or meaningful role in reality.

Mr Jack wrote: Say wha?”HM

:

quote:

---

:Atheism, as a philosophical view, is the position that either affirms the nonexistence of gods[1] or rejects theism.

---

You're absolutely right, which is why I have suggested to a number of atheists that it might be in their best interests to at least give agnosticism a closer look.I've made this argument before that to truly be an atheist, one has to posit the non-existence of God in terms of absolution. Obviously, no one can truly do that. Absolute knowledge of the universe would have to be known in order to posit such a thing and be right. Too late. After you said what you just did, they will come out of the woodwork to play a game of semantics with you, even though you are surely correct.

---

"I love those who can smile in trouble, who can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but they whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves their conduct, will pursue their principles unto death." -Leonardo da Vinci

This is what Rob would write if he were an atheist.

---

I could tell you what I've read about evolution, the big-bang, super-universes, quantum foam, and all that stuff. Eventually you'd ask a question I can't answer, then I'd have to go look it up. Even If I had the time for that shit, in the end you'd ask a question science hasn't answered yet. So let's save time and skip ahead to "I don't know." -- jhuger

Jon, maybe your issue is rooted in the meaning of the term "existence," or in its inverse "non-existence." Can you differentiate between these terms? What kind of existence or non-existence are you talking about? I'll admit that God has literary existence, but so does Santa, Tinker Bell, and the Great Pumpkin. My grandsons (ages 6 & 5) still believe that Santa exists, but they'll grow out of it. When will you grow up and put away your childish beliefs? It will be an important step forward for you.btw: If you believe in God then why is "existence" or "non-existence" even an issue for you? Isn't your belief enough to take care of whatever "proofs" you need?btw2: Have you ever heard of a Darwinian biologist bursting into a church on Sunday morning and demanding the pastor to prove that God exists? Most Darwinian biologists I know have better thing to do on Sunday morning.”HM

Atheism and agnosticism are the exact same thing.Look, I'm as certain as I can be that there's no God. Since I have full certainty, I'm an atheist. Since "full certainty" also includes some degree of tentativity (since I'm a reasonable person), I'm an agnostic.I'm both. I'm an agnostic atheist. I'm a 6 on the Dawkins scale, like Dawkins himself. Like Dawkins I have no problem making the statement "there almost certainly is no such thing as God." A statement that I believe the evidence abundantly supports. And we've rebutted it before. It's hardly necessary to have perfect knowledge to come to conclusions about things, Indeed, if it were, science would be impossible.

The difference is that Rob would be taking himself completely seriously and would truly believe that he had made a final, damning argument.

In fact, it would be impossible to even conduct a normal life.

---

I could tell you what I've read about evolution, the big-bang, super-universes, quantum foam, and all that stuff. Eventually you'd ask a question I can't answer, then I'd have to go look it up. Even If I had the time for that shit, in the end you'd ask a question science hasn't answered yet. So let's save time and skip ahead to "I don't know." -- jhuger