No Proof is NO PROOF for Inexistence of God.

reply to post by logical7

'MONOTHIESM existed first and was revived in abrahamic religions not plagiarised.'

Can you source this to the book and page? I don't recall reading that. You presented it as a quote. The book states that pantheism came first. ...
according to my interpretation anyway.

reply to post by wildtimes


Emptyness and yearning? no I'm afraid not. If anything I feel the complete opposite, I don't live my life worrying if I'm going to hell because I know there is no hell. Let's face it if there was a heaven and hell nobody would be going to heaven because nobody is without sin.

If you would like me to explain how I feel I think the best word would be content. I know this is my one chance at life, there is no god, there is no heaven and hell. You have to make the most of this life as you won't get another chance.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Who knows?

But if the conclusion is a divine being then definintely not.

Originally posted by GafferUK1981
reply to post by KaelemJames

 

No jesus wasn't the son of any creator unless you count man's imagination.

That's your opinion & belief.

There isn't even any reliable proof jesus existed, if he was so important surely there would be some evidence.

There's enough proof for me spiritually. You can Google if there was a man called Jesus/Yeshua, and decide for yourself. I believe cos' i have faith.

You do realise the bible was written decades after jesus supposedly died don't you?

As Wonders corrected me here. Jesus did read from scriptures from The Old Testament.

You're right about one thing though, you're never too old to learn, Put down that stupid bible and buy a science book with some actual researched facts written in it. Aren't you getting too old for fairytales.

My spiritual journey is what i have chosen. I don't come here and bash non-believers.

In the end, i have absolutely nothing to lose & only to gain, and, my life ain't miserable either.

No Proof is NO PROOF for Inexistence of God

You are right. 'No proof' is not proof that God isn't real. Side note - all things considered, I'm thinking some big 'proof' that God is real will be coming to the planet very soon. And there will be no denying it. (IMHO)

reply to post by FlyersFan

You are right. 'No proof' is not proof that God isn't real.

This is what passes for science these days? Sounds like something Westboro Baptist dreamed up. Makes me want to shoot myself.

Everything that we know exists today, has proof of existence. We know it exists because we have proof of it. So what makes your god special that it shouldn't be assessed by the same standards?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Because no one can prove a negative position without absolute knowledge.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Because no one can prove a negative position without absolute knowledge.

In all of science, there is nothing that we have said exists as a fact without having ample proof of it being so. Why should your deity be judged any differently? Why should our science, the most effective educational and discerning process we have witnessed as a species to date, give your deity exception simply because you don't have the courage to admit to yourself that you might be wrong?

Even the Big Bang is a theory. We give it credit because it is by far the best theory we have compiled so far. But it is a theory, no less. There is even less empirical evidence for your god, and you tout it as fact. It's an insult to science and the intellect of mankind to disregard our most potent cognitive system just to assuage the insecurities of the feeble-minded.

That is what I see in this discussion. I don't understand where you are coming from...perhaps if you explain yourself more clearly, we can come to an understanding in the matter? Even if I don't agree with what you believe, I would like to at least understand why you believe it.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

No Proof is NO PROOF for Inexistence of God

You are right. 'No proof' is not proof that God isn't real.

Side note - all things considered, I'm thinking some big 'proof' that God is real will be coming to the planet very soon. And there will be no denying it. (IMHO)

Oh boy you said not me and there will be some denying of it I can assure you.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Okay. Simple example.

Negative claim: "There is no gold in China."

In order for this to be "proved" true as a claim the person would need to be in every square foot of China, on the surface and in the Earth below, simultaneously to verify there isn't any gold anywhere in the country whatsoever.

It's impossible for a person to prove that negative claim true.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Okay. Simple example.

Negative claim: "There is no gold in China."

In order for this to be "proved" true as a claim the person would need to be in every square foot of China, on the surface and in the Earth below, simultaneously to verify there isn't any gold anywhere in the country whatsoever.

It's impossible for a person to prove that negative claim true.

True. However, you can mathematically predict possibilities according to a number of variables determined by precedent cases. You can predict that there is a certain possibility of finding gold in this particular part of China due to this and this case being used in correlation with this data concerning gold and that type of land in order to calculate an approximate probability of finding gold. You can make an educated guess.

You can't do that with deities.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Predictions are not "proof". I said no one can prove a negative claim without absolute knowledge.

Lets just assess what a theory is. It's an explanation based on known facts and evidence.

Evolution is a theory but it can be witnessed, there is mountains of evidence to support it.

The Big Bang is a theory but there is evidence to support it. Also predictions made by the Big Bang theory such as expansion are real.

Now for the god theory. There's an old book that becomes less and less relevant every day as claims made in the book are proven to be untrue. There is no actual evidence and considering this god supposedly created everything there is nothing we have found that cannot exist without a god. This is an incredibly poor theory that too many people subscribe to.

God isn't even worthy of a theory. Hypothesis maybe, but a poor one.

Originally posted by GafferUK1981
reply to post by logical7

 

I'm 100% atheist, I don't even consider there is a possibility that one of man kinds many gods exist.

Why aren't I miserable?

because you have done backward rationalisation to form a 'belief.'
humans have an inbuilt need to have a belief, doesnt matter if it has 'God' or 'No God'
and it doesnt matter if that rationalisation is true or made up.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Predictions are not "proof". I said no one can prove a negative claim without absolute knowledge.

I didn't say proof. I said informed projections can give us a mathematical probability of something being true and to what extent. According to such methods, we can reasonably state that the god of the Bible is not real.

Because if such methods were able to state with confidence that the probability of such a being existing is reasonably solid, you wouldn't need faith. Faith is basically us saying, "I feel that this possible end result is a very good reason to lie to myself." And such a sentiment is based on values, which are instilled in us at a very early age as part of the training process that aids us in maturing both physically and emotionally.

If the methods above were in favor of "God", faith would be completely unnecessary, just like faith is completely unnecessary in the observation of gravity.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

ok you win. If that makes you feel better, however read the book "a history of God" by a historian Karen Armstrong as she may disagree and say that "God"/monotheism existed first and then the pagan ideas and rituals came.

Dude, you read it?!!

Already!??
It's a big book. I'm still working on the re-read - it's the kind of book that one must read in doses, then contemplate and compare/contrast.......
I'm on the last chapter now.

'MONOTHIESM existed first and was
revived in abrahamic religions not
plagiarised.'

Can you source this to the book and
page? I don't recall reading that. You
presented it as a quote. The book
states that pantheism came first. ...
according to my interpretation
anyway.

i am still reading it. I read that theory mentioned in the 1st chapter 'in the beginning.'
about a book by Wilhelm Schmidt, origin of the idea of God.
The idea of 'primitive monotheism' is likely to be true, Karen Armstrong agrees that it can neither be proved nor denied completely.
The style of her writing is objective and acceptable to atheists and theists alike and is open to interpretations either way.
The fact remains that its a reporting of only the recorded available history, informative and a bit dull but not conclusive about the point we are discussing.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

oh yes i do! A chance of these tales being true is more likely than the chance of universe being created and existing by chance. Do you believe this tale?

Oh, dude!

No, you don't actually believe it, do you?
Do you?!!!
If you actually read Karen Armstrong's book you would KNOW that those are myths! They are archetypal metaphors, NOT LITERAL HISTORY.
gha

i have not yet reached till that part of the book but i seriously doubt that i will 'KNOW' that those are myths!
Maybe you interpret it that way and then assume that you KNOW. However i better read it first and then respond to you again.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

No Proof is NO PROOF for Inexistence of God

You are right. 'No proof' is not proof that God isn't real.

Side note - all things considered, I'm thinking some big 'proof' that God is real will be coming to the planet very soon. And there will be no denying it. (IMHO)

that will really be good. I am happy to find that we finally agree on something.

reply to post by GafferUK1981

there is no heaven and hell. You have to make the most of this life as you won't get another chance.

One need not accept the myths of "heaven" and "hell" (yes, both are myths) to believe that our souls are immortal.

What you think of as "God" or 'god' may be very different from what I think of. I believe in neither heaven NOR hell, I believe in reincarnation and the immortality of the 'soul' in one form or another, and I believe the ancient "inexplicability" of the Ground of Being, or Ultimate Concern ideology -

'God' is not a person.
God is nothing like any of us, and nothing like anything we can imagine. Definitely not "Old Man in the Sky" tyrant thing. NOT LIKE US at all. There is no 'superhuman judge and grantor of wishes keeping tabs on us all day, every day, awake or asleep', etc. No.

But there is, without doubt, a "topic" that human beings across all cultures have contemplated of the unseen reality that we sense we are part of (and we are).

'God' is a concept of that Ultimate Source and Oneness that pervades everything, is present in all we see, and that no one can explain. It's the idolatry and personalization of the REALLY ancient beliefs from mysticism, Buddhism, Greek philosophy, etc. that is the problem, and dangerous and immature. There is an unspeakable, indefinable something that we are unable to comprehend, but can conceive of only in silence, wonder, awe, and mystery.

The religions that try to anthropomorphize (e.g. 'jesus is god.') and make 'God' a "personal friend, guide, judge and parent" are the worst offenders. In my opinion. God can neither be explained nor 'properly' imagined - it is bigger than ANY 'thing' we can imagine. We need to understand that. We can't know.

But we CAN KNOW that we can't know. It remains a mystery until at the very least we die. But mystics for untold ages have striven to bridge the gap between 'image' or 'word' and 'intuitive recognition' that (having experienced it myself) is fleeting (as described by the masters), but possible.

And that, in itself, is a kind of 'knowing.' Jesus taught the same thing as Gautama and Krishna and mystics too numerous to name and indigenous tribal shamans and priests.....
the real truth is that WE CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH, because we are not able to describe it or to begin to comprehend what it is. That's what the mystic thinking across the world has taught. It's a mistake to say "That man is god." or, "That cloud is God." NOTHING we have here can accurately represent it.

reply to post by logical7

Maybe you interpret it that way and then assume that you KNOW. However i better read it first and then respond to you again.

Coolio! (means: fantastic, great!) I really want to discuss and bring forth some of her ideas in a couple of threads. Yes, I believe that I KNOW they are myths. And it's high time the rest of the common people realized it. Her book is a classic, and she is unsurpassed in her field...

But if no one else who hangs out here is going to read it, it'll be much less stimulating......!!! Take your time, log7, but, HURRY!