Proof for God's Non-existance?

No, I'm not overlooking that possibility at all. I mentioned that very possibility in my last post. I specifically asked you to explain how so many observers fail to detect God. If you have no explanation for why an observation was made, you have no basis to discount the obvervation.Explain, or the observation stands: there is no God in my fridge.(Hint: you can't use the Bible in your explanation, because it hasn't been verified as a reliable source.) There hasn't been any "information" provided regarding God's markup, or even His makeup. You have asserted what you believe, but you've shown nothing that a consensus can observe and agree on.Edited by Ringo, : Spellelling.Edited by Ringo, : Clarified by removing a superfluous "not".

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

I see no problem with a conversation between God and Satan. I doubt this is isolated either. I think there are a few who believe Satan is not real, however, I have read the information to that effect and concluded that according to the scriptures, he is indeed real. So, this is a matter of personal belief and oppinion.

---

The problem is that you are using the Book of Job as substantiation that God made a claim. So while in your life you can have any personal belief or opinion you wish, in this type of debate it serves no purpose.You continue to assert that God made a claim, but have yet to provide the source containing the claim.A fictional work does not fit the bill.

quote:

---

Would that be the historical evidence that you've been asked to provide multiple times, having failed to provide it following the first request, the second request, and each request thereafter?

​

Is there historical evidence? If so, where?

​

Jon

---

Though I did address similar requests under this thread, topic deviation was imminent.
What stood out however was the sudden turning of the tables under the terms of the original discussion. If memory serves me right, it was the original poster who called on none believers to provide us with evidence to disprove Gods existence and not the other way around.Since so many posters seem determined to argue in the other sense, perhaps we should spawn a new topic to cater to the alternate side of the argument.

quote:

---

The problem is that you are using the Book of Job as substantiation that God made a claim. So while in your life you can have any personal belief or opinion you wish, in this type of debate it serves no purpose.

---

I anxiously await the evidence you have to disprove that claim.

quote:

---

You continue to assert that God made a claim, but have yet to provide the source containing the claim.

---

False, I provided you with a claim and you counter claimed it was false based on nothing. That won't do.

quote:

---

A fictional work does not fit the bill.

---

Do you have evidence to show that is fictional work?Edited by pbee, : typo

quote:

---

(Hint: you can't use the Bible in your explanation, because it hasn't been verified as a reliable source.)

---

That won't do I'm afraid. Unless you have outstanding authority(proven) then such statements do not stand for much. Edited by pbee, : No reason given.

You have it backwards. The source has to be verified.Those who question the source don't have to prove to your satisfaction that your source is unreliable. You need to show evidence that your source is not fiction.Now, I have observed no God in my fridge. If you claim that my observation is wrong, you have to explain why it's wrong. Does the Detect-o-God need new batteries?And Curious George is not an acceptable source either.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

James Bond is in lots of books, as well, so we have good written evidence for his existence. If it's written in a book, it's evidence, as you know. Anyway, how could we have won the cold war if he didn't exist?

Wasn't this thread about providing evidence that God does not exist? Or have I misread the original topic?All I'm saying is that stating you cannot see God in your fridge does not say much in light of His existence. This is far from a general statement isn't it? For example, does your personal experience conclude there is no God as a whole, or are we looking at your own personal experience?Putting it into perspective, Ringo did not find God in his fridge, therefore he does not believe in God.

Fun fact - James Bond actually did exist, he was an ornithologist that Ian Fleming knew, and borrowed his name with permission for his novels.

I know that's all your saying. I'd like you to be answering the question: Why do I fail to observe God in my fridge if He's "everywhere"? If I fail to observe God, in fact anywhere, why?The general rule is that if something exists, it can be observed, repeatably, by objective observers. Through millions of observers repeatably failing to observe God, we can reason inductively that He can not be observed (does not exist).The problem with the claimed positive observations of God - such as yours - is that they are not repeatable. Christians observe one thing, Muslims observe something else and Raelians observe something else again. It can be concluded that at least some of their observations must be false positives.You need to explain why the Raelians' and the ancient Egyptians' observations were wrong - and you need to explain why the negatives are "false" negatives.Edited by Ringo, : Added missing apostrophe - oh, those posessive Raelians.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

He's described several times in the Bible as being invisible, which might explain his apparent absence from your fridge.On one occasion, Moses sees the invisible, which is a pretty impressive feat on his part, IMO.Not being Moses, you could always look for his footprints in the butter, I suppose.

Atoms are everywhere too, but you won't be observing them in your fridge. Should we assume atoms don't exist by your logic?

---

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

quote:

---

Now, I have observed no God in my fridge. If you claim that my observation is wrong, you have to explain why it's wrong. Does the Detect-o-God need new batteries?

---

Jesus stated God was a spirit 'Pneu”ma'(John 4:24). So that *could explain the lack thereof visual appearances in your fridge or otherwise.

quote:

---

The general rule is that if something exists, it can be observed, repeatably, by objective observers. Through millions of observers repeatably failing to observe God, we can reason inductively that He can not be observed (does not exist).

---

Well thats interesting isn't it. It would seem as though God's presence can be observed. seen here
Whether or not it can be observed by everyone seems to be another story altogether.

quote:

---

The problem with the claimed positive observations of God - such as yours - is that they are not repeatable. Christians observe one thing, Muslims observe something else and Raelians observe something else again. It can be concluded that at least some of their observations must be false positives.

---

Well this is true to some extent. Unless of course we have reasons to justify the changes. For example, during the era of biblical writings, there was a great deal of repeatable activity between God and humans. However, there came a point where such intervention was discontinued following the fulfillment of one of the primary prophesies.As for alternate claims, I can only speak from a personal standpoint, though I plan on researching alternate doctrines. I cannot comment nor discount them at this point in time.

You have got to be kidding. My fridge is chock-full of atoms.Observations don't have to be direct, you know.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Your source is unverified. The criterion is objective observers. Once again, if somebody fails to agree with the observation, you need to explain why.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC