|
There isn't a shred of evidence to support the actual existence of any god(s), therefore a rational
person is perfectly justified in not believing in them.
That's atheism. A=without, theos=belief.
Go chase after your strawmen somewhere else. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Well what a daft question, of course God exists, you prove it every time you open your eyes in the
morning, or you feel pain. You see it every-time you look out the window at the trees and the
weather and the intricacies of nature. Have you ever looked in to an atom or beyond.
Have you ever suffered the death of a close family member and though the tears flow and there is a
lump in your throat, your spirit feels a peace? What more proof could you need from solid spiritual
creation, or would you rather believe things that are created through a happenstance theory with no
substance.
The evidence surrounds you, nothing is ever created without design first. It is that obvious, man
just needs to get off his seat and open his eyes and receive by his mind. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Non Atheists - Prove your God does exist then!!! I want photographs, video, artifacts, any physical
proof. Get him to phone me at 18.00 GMT tomorrow and say the words " don"t doubt me you mere
immortal" and I will verily spread the word planetarily........ |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
If Gode does not exist, it is the only example of a concept known by billions of people and
non-existent. Name something else, known by millions of people, that does not exist at all... |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The way the human brain works allows us to believe in what we cannot see like "faith"
But we have had faith in so much which is too big for us to understand where that faith has been
wrong
The earth is the center of the universe
The earth is flat
blablabla
By this point in time having faith in one thing for that which we do not know has been proven wrong
time, and time again
That logically we must attempt to prove things right or pick the most reasonable explanation for
something based on what we DO know
And when people began believing in God or Gods they did not know much!
Given your knowledge f the planet and those on it, now assume no religions were ever created. And
you go to sleep with that knowledge. If you woke up the next morning and there was a man at the mall
named Jesus who laid down the rules of a God given his Knowledge of the way the world works, he
explains his ideas and preaches them. You would think " what is he talking about the earth is
round, we have been through the sky on space shuttles and never passed a place called heaven, and I
know for sure everything rotates around the son."
You would think he is crazy and you wouldn't be thinking for yourself.
So for now until evidence has presented itself, (evidence is something that is proven common and
true for all people which is undeniable) we can only assume that no there is no God
But that isn't to say you can prove that he exists or does not |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
NO it says in the bible that god is real and everyone knows it |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You cannot prove something does not exist. It is as simple as that. The burden of proof must fall
on those who say something does exist. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Claiming that atheists must prove that "god" does not exist is the same as me demanding that you
prove you are not a pedophile.
The burden of proof always lies with those making the assertion, never will those refuting it.
Those who claim there is a "god" have the burden of responsibility to prove it, not for anyone else
to disprove it. The same logical burden of proof that says "no 'god' until proven" also says
"innocent until proven guilty" in court and "false until proven true" in the science laboratory.
The religious have never proven their "god" exists. Until they do, the burden of proof lies with
them - or rather, what's proven is that their lies are a burden on society.
The religious seek to change the burden of proof because they KNOW they cannot prove a "god" exists.
Some do it because they are intellectually weak, but most do it because religion is an easy path to
money, power and social status. |
| |
 K9  19 Apr 2008 08:46
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You can’t successfully “prove” the existence or nonexistence of something without such
evidence to the contrary of either. In my outlook, which is the scientific outlook, objectivity and
materialistic evidence must be provided before a valid conclusion can be reached. I agree that the
burden of proof is on those who make the claim. However, I’m not a supporter of the “No evidence
to the nonexistence” idea. That particular theory is not falsifiable and doesn’t rule out any
possibilities, therefore, it is unscientific. If the claim “There’s no evidence for the
nonexistence of a supernatural being” is considered an actual objection, then leprechauns, Santa
Claus, and the Tooth Fairy are equally existing characters, since, of course, there’s no evidence
for their nonexistence. It’s as if I were to claim I had an imaginary friend named Bob, who only I
could detect with any of my senses. If I told you that there’s no way you could ever detect Bob,
no matter what you did or how hard you tried, you wouldn’t have any plausible reason to accept my
claim, but you also wouldn’t have a plausible reason to rule out the possibility of my claim
either. The most suitable way for you to handle the situation would be to accept that the
possibility of the claim’s factuality exists, but not to support the idea that my claim is
factual. The point I’m trying to make is that, although I agree that the absence of evidence is
not the evidence of absence, I also agree that the absence of evidence is not reason to conclude. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This isn't the proper forum for such a debate... Your topic is passive aggressive albeit not alone
in its efforts |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yawn. Prove giant pink space elephants don't exist. Prove aliens don't exist. This was already dealt
with in another thread but you just keep mindlessly reiterating the same points even after they've
been disposed of. Great debating technique. Utterly utterly shallow and actually pitiful. This is
what christianity has been reduced to in this day and age. Thank you for demonstrating the
intellectual bankruptcy of your belief system. |
| |
|
| |
| | |
