[Discussion] do athiests have proof that god don't exist????..

minamoto

Active member
Supreme
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
22,577
Kin
25,811💸
Kumi
11,914💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
i---------------->.

do you atheists have proof that god don't exist?????...cuz u keep bla bla bla bla god don't exist...well show me ur proofs.. :mad::mad:

for god of sake don't tell me science is answer and bla bla bla....cuz even sience dont give exact results ..so????...
 

Rohan

Active member
Supreme
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
23,835
Kin
1,027💸
Kumi
1,522💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
We do not need to prove anything. The burden of proof is with the theists.

A positive claim, that is God exists requires some physical phenomena to serve as evidence.

Since theists do not have any evidence that God exists thier claim can be dismissed as false.

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor expressed by writer Christopher Hitchens. It says that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens has phrased the razor in writing as "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."
Atheists are essentially making a negative claim. Since they do not see evidence for God, thier claim stands strong. The burden of proof to prove God is on the religious people, not the athiests.[1][2][3][4]
Post automatically merged:

To the above point I want to add that everything that exists in this world can only be proven by using science, reason and logic. If science doess not have value then you will not be able to make this thread in the first place. Everything that you use is because of Science. This is an undeniable fact.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Urda and YowYan

minamoto

Active member
Supreme
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
22,577
Kin
25,811💸
Kumi
11,914💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
We do not need to prove anything. The burden of proof is with the theists.

A positive claim, that is God exists requires some physical phenomena to serve as evidence.

Since theists do not have any evidence that God exists thier claim can be dismissed as false.

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor expressed by writer Christopher Hitchens. It says that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens has phrased the razor in writing as "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."
Atheists are essentially making a negative claim. Since they do not see evidence for God, thier claim stands strong. The burden of proof to prove God is on the religious people, not the athiests.[1][2][3][4]
Post automatically merged:

To the above point I want to add that everything that exists in this world can only be proven by using science, reason and logic. If science doess not have value then you will not be able to make this thread in the first place. Everything that you use is because of Science. This is an undeniable fact.
redbold : speak of urself...

blackbold : u rn't even a atheist..u r what i call a sacalantcho..these gategori of pipole just folow otherz wthout tinking..and they are scared of god secretly..
 

Chikombo

Active member
Elite
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
7,420
Kin
9,371💸
Kumi
1,003💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
If I had to come up with something I would suggest that the different world views the different scriptures gives are all scientifically wrong, so believing in them doesn't make sense.
If you want to go specifically on the question how can something exist without a creator.
Well I'm not caught up on that debate, so I wouldn't know all the arguments, but the leap from assuming there needs to be a creator to the golden rule or cover up women or whatever religion tells you to do is a pretty big one.

What created the creator if there was one then?

Just because we don't know how the universe can exist, doesn't mean the answer is God.
Post automatically merged:

redbold : speak of urself...

blackbold : u rn't even a atheist..u r what i call a sacalantcho..these gategori of pipole just folow otherz wthout tinking..and they are scared of god secretly..
I am terrified of God. I wasn't scared before I became an atheist but now I am.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: minamoto

Chikombo

Active member
Elite
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
7,420
Kin
9,371💸
Kumi
1,003💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
Without science as an argument I would say that the proof is all the religious rules makes no sense and contradicts a normal soceity anyway.

People say religion is the core of a modern society, I'm not sure that's true, people who preach that like Jordan Peterson has their own idea of what faith is, their religion is not deconstructed from the bible, it's a modern agenda of freedom of speech and conservativism that really has nothing to do with judeochristianity if you interpret it literally, years in the future people might have a different intepretation, bottomline is that people make up their own rules, as they are written they don't work, in fact if someone were to follow them blindly that person would fail at life.
So since the rules don't make sense it doesn't make sense they were created in favor of a divine being that created us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pumpkin Ninja

Infant

Active member
Regular
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
1,949
Kin
5,794💸
Kumi
1,695💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Actually, it us possible to dissprove certain ideas from religion.

If any religion - there are multiple, so it is wrong to treat religion as a singular thing - makes a claim, such as there being flying horses within specific conditions, then those conditions can be investigated and tested for flying horses.

Of course, there is generally room for . . . what if the horses are invisible, or super small so you can see them etc . . . but otherwise claims from religion are easy to test.

Now because it is still possible for any supreme being to simply be hanging back and not directly interfering, at least not in ways we can test, disproving any single claim may not disprove all religion, but it can at least disprove more specific claims or ideas.

Now based on this thread and other threads, it is clear that we're not really set to properly discuss these things, so i advise hanging back on such topics.
 

Avaitto

#mangafacts
Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
3,840
Kin
32💸
Kumi
854💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
Makes sense:grand:
No it doesn't, the description of your God says he sits on a chair held by angels as wide as the heavens and earth and it's on top of water and it's the heaviest of his creation (affected by gravity), please explain how this is outside of the material universe, also I don't think we can imagine what's outside the material universe so how did you know it was your God or a God which is a man made concept and not something else?
 

salamander uchiha

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
17,628
Kin
9,043💸
Kumi
6,082💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
No it doesn't, the description of your God says he sits on a chair held by angels as wide as the heavens and earth and it's on top of water and it's the heaviest of his creation (affected by gravity), please explain how this is outside of the material universe, also I don't think we can imagine what's outside the material universe so how did you know it was your God or a God which is a man made concept and not something else?
Nope, God is immeasurable and tells you there is no misl (example) of him. Any verse that provides a literal description aren't taken as literal for a reason. It's a holistic book, not a selective book. Quite easily God tells you he was when there was nothing (no material universe) and he will be when there is nothing (destruction of the universe before judgment). All created things will cease to exist, therefore no material universe yet God will still exist. Don't let butthurt get you down you must've met a salafi (retards).
 
  • Haha
Reactions: minamoto

Chikombo

Active member
Elite
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
7,420
Kin
9,371💸
Kumi
1,003💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
Nope, God is immeasurable and tells you there is no misl (example) of him. Any verse that provides a literal description aren't taken as literal for a reason. It's a holistic book, not a selective book. Quite easily God tells you he was when there was nothing (no material universe) and he will be when there is nothing (destruction of the universe before judgment). All created things will cease to exist, therefore no material universe yet God will still exist. Don't let butthurt get you down you must've met a salafi (retards).
So the bible is 60 books of allegories and not a literal description?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: minamoto

Avaitto

#mangafacts
Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
3,840
Kin
32💸
Kumi
854💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
Nope, God is immeasurable and tells you there is no misl (example) of him. Any verse that provides a literal description aren't taken as literal for a reason. It's a holistic book, not a selective book. Quite easily God tells you he was when there was nothing (no material universe) and he will be when there is nothing (destruction of the universe before judgment). All created things will cease to exist, therefore no material universe yet God will still exist. Don't let butthurt get you down you must've met a salafi (retards).
If it's a holistic book why are you selecting the description of the throne being not literal and not the entirety, and how do we know that what this book says is true? from all the scientifically incorrect illiteral information we both know?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: minamoto
Top