I Know That God Does Not Exist

Same as for anything else: Those claiming that the idea has a connection to reality need to show that connection to reality.
Without that - it's irrational for them to suggest that the idea should have any effect on our knowledge about reality.

That wasn't the question. If nobody was claiming a connection to reality, how would you know whether there was a connection to reality?

I agree you can know how to bake a cake: There is a connection between cakes and reality and your performance. Meet those requirements and you know you can bake a cake. I am aware of the requirements, I don't doubt it's possible for you to meet them - therefore I cannot say: I know ringo cannot bake a cake.Of course, for God's existence - there is no connection from imagination to reality.
Without that - I know that God does not exist.It's demonstrated like this: There is no connection from the imagination of God to reality.
That's it.It's easy to break that demonstration for all other things we think can exist:
-ringo baking cakes
-ringo existing
-cakes existing
-ringo being a person
-people being able to bake cakesIf those all didn't exist... if there was no connection between cakes or ringo-baking-them to reality, then I could say "I know ringo cannot bake a cake."
But... there is, so I can't say it.For God?
-no connection between imagination and reality.
-Therefore: I know that God does not exist.Just provide the connection from imagination to reality for God and it all goes away.

Then you can stop saying that I can't know anything. That's not a demonstration. That should be fairly obvious since there is no connection to reality. there is no cake. Again, you're the one making a positive claim that the negative is true. The onus is on you to back up your claim.

You don't build a peaceful happy world by pretending that dangerous people are not dangerous, that way is guaranteed to bring the very murder and mayhem you want to avoid. This kind of cowardly pretense is going on with the denials that Islam is dangerous. Not "Muslims," since there is no way to know how much of their religion or which version of it they hold without investigation, but Islam itself. Yes the Reformers by using biblical clues discovered that the papacy is the Antichrist. This one right now is a particularly good example. And again this isn't about Catholics in general, it's about the papacy.

Only if you stop saying you can't know negative things.
If you can't know negative things, then you can't know positive things either - because the reason you can't know either is the same (something not currently part of our "current information" may exist that shows it to be wrong.) It is a demonstration.
And it's simple to overcome - just provide the connection between God and reality.
Without doing that - there is no connection between God and reality.
Without a connection between God and reality - I know that God does not exist. It is backed up:
Without a connection between God and reality - I know that God does not exist.

Exactly.The only wiggle room is attempting to create confusion:Like suggesting that "knowledge" is absolute.
-it isn't, knowledge is tentative and based on our currently available informationOr suggesting that an idea of God is rational, therefore the idea-that-God-exists is rational
-this is very illogical and rather absurdOr suggesting that "we can't know negative things."
-also clearly wrong, and becomes clear when you remember that knowledge is tentative and based on our currently available information

So let's recap what we have so far.You've mostly said nothing, except dodges, complaining that blanks weren't filled in or that there are other ideas of god etc. I've done all the explaining. Are your dodges, complaints that there are other ideas of god, a tacit agreement that I've shown the monotheistic (Christian, Jewish, Moslem etc.) and pagan (thunderbolt-throwing types) religions and ideas of god are all irrational? If you do agree, that's quite a concession. If you don't agree, and are merely dodging the issue, it's clear you have nothing to back your position up with.Clear so far? Anything I've said above that you disagree with?

C. S. Lewis made an interesting argument in Mere Christianity. I'm surprised that nobody here wants to talk about that.

You've already admitted that I can know something. I will not admit that you can "know" a negative in the same way. So no. Nonsense. You keep demanding a connection to reality. Now you show one.You can't just wave your magic wand and pull the curtain away and say, "Voila! Elephants don't exist." That is not a demonstration of reality.

It's about all religion. It's a bad thing. Notice the argument people make that religion isn't so bad because Stalin was a bigger mass murderer. Yeah, and mercury doesn't kill as fast as cyanide. But I'd rather not ingest either.

Liar.I've asked you to explain the logic errors in the idea of God. You steadfastly refuse to do so.You're the one who's dodging.

Sorry kid, "nonsense" isn't an argument.

Because knowledge isn't based on absolutes.
Knowledge is based on the information available to us. You keep making this same error. Again, and again, and again.If nobody was claiming a connection to reality - then the information available to us shows there's no connection to reality.Therefore, the tentative conclusion is that I know God does not exist - because there's no connection between imagination and reality based on the information available to us.And, since all knowledge is tentative, and all knowledge is based on the information available to us - we can leave these out as they are redundant:I know God does not exist.

Now you're calling me a "liar"? Goodness, such un-Christian sentiments!You are a Christian, aren't you? Or are you going to dodge that one too?